6 ms·

Unfortunately these days we're forced to consider the possibility that even your post is part of a professional manipulation campaign. Or mine. Or every other p

Unfortunately these days we're forced to consider the possibility that even your post is part of a professional manipulation campaign. Or mine. Or every other post out here. We just don't know. That's the crux of the problem for me. Nowadays, I'm so jaded that I trust no one. It's sad. I've lost trust, and I don't think I can get it back.

kickling 9y ago
It's probably a good thing, at least on the Internet.
landryraccoon 9y ago
Does trust mean automatically taking for granted the truth of anonymous statements you read online? If so that trust never should have existed in the first place, and it should be gone forever.
- aoeusnth1 9y ago
  Not taken as truth, but taken as in good faith by default. The amount of manipulative and dishonest content has gone up quite a bit.
  - RyanZAG 9y ago
    Has it gone up, or have you only been made aware of it now?
- golergka 9y ago
  That's exactly what was written on 4chan's /b/ for years. Despite having a ridiculous reputation, this place was always excellent at helping it's users develop the right attitude toward internet in general: don't trust anyone, don't let your emotions take control, and don't be so damn serious.
  - watwut 9y ago
    The last descriptor I would use for 4chan is "cold calm rational".
    - golergka 9y ago
      You clearly haven't spent enough time on it - that's exactly the qualities that it trains within you, although the method it uses is kinda harsh.
      - watwut 9y ago
        It is a place where people go to with their uncontrolled emotional outbursts. Which is their thing when those outbursts don't have impact on rest of the world and really not fine when it leaks outside. Yes, swear words lost all their meaning for many on 4chan. That does not make people using them any more rational.
        forgottenpass 9y ago
        It's not about sharpening your wits thorough osmosis, it's about seeing nonsense laid bare at your feet. Leveraging that to see through the pretense of "smarter" conversation to understand it's the exact same stuff: shit-flinging, misleading but plausible half-lies, active propaganda, underinformed dummies thinking they're having a deep conversation, etc... The zen that parent poster describes comes when you recognize that your favorite political commentator, or the thing your best friend just said over coffee are not inherently smarter or dumber than 4chan. edit: w/r/t "leaking outside.": The problem isn't that Trump was meme-ed into the whitehouse. The problem is that paternalistic control of messaging will never equip the populace to evaluate something as nonsense when the parents aren't around to stop the message from propagating.
        watwut 9y ago
        By leaking outside I meant a.) coordinated harassment b.) people being shocked that the rest of world does not share 4chan habits and culture - including channers being honestly shocked that people react negatively to unrelated Hitler meme used as argument and not taking author as some king of genius for that. Because channer using hitler and nazi symbolism did not even realized what those things means or were (except general understanding that it was something edgy). I don't really think Trump got to white house bc 4chan, I believe his voters voted him because he represents them as he is.
joe_the_user 9y ago
Personally, I can use Google to double check claims fairly easily. I actually have given up a lot of urban-myth beliefs that were wide-spread in even the 90s. I regularly check and flag false or dubious claims friend's posts on Facebook (where I'd say Facebook gets a bum-rap in some ways because friends can point out fake stuff). As far as not knowing where a given post comes from, that's OK if you are careful in your double checking. But the opposite pole is people who don't care whether what they post is true. Usually I and those people go separate ways. So the ultimate thing is naturally the bifurcation of online communities, with some portion becoming highly partisan and willing to repeat fake info simply to serve a given pole of opinion (not necessarily "extreme").
- zaarn 9y ago
  Careful of fact checking with Google, it can easily validate something as truth that isn't. The best option is to usually include the keyword "study" and actively look for only that data.
  - joe_the_user 9y ago
    Perhaps I made a mistake in supposing that someone would take "using Google" as "search until I found several studies or good discussions on a given topic, compare the data, the arguments, the point of view and so-forth of each study then come to a conclusion" rather than, say, using Google's auto-generated answers to a few topic.
zeth___ 9y ago
>Unfortunately these days we're forced to consider the possibility that even your post is part of a professional manipulation campaign. Or mine. Or every other post out here. The only way to beat this is to have an end goal that is objectively good regardless of who says it. Bringing the first amendment into the 21st century and forcing corporations with open access discussion systems to be treated like government entities is a win for everyone. After all the first amendment in it's original form only stopped the federal government from imprisoning you before you said something, not after, and had nothing at all to say about what states governments could or couldn't do.
- bilbo0s 9y ago
  The First Amendment doesn't beat professional manipulation campaigns, it facilitates them. I've realized recently that the goood thing about the First Amendment is that it leads to an electorate that is as jaded as myself. One that views every Facebook, or HN, or internet post as potentially part of a state sponsored manipulation campaign.
  - nugi 9y ago
    So the 1st is bad because it makes you have to think?
pervycreeper 9y ago
Is there a way to combat this phenomenon (generally: bad faith posting) with technical means?
csanch4 9y ago
This is such a lazy/defeatist statement. I'm hoping you still know that, in the midst of all this noise, facts and truths continue to exist -- so do well-informed opinions that can be fact-checked. Also, accepting this holier than thou persona from televised/printed "professional" media is being ignorant to their adoption of sensationalism and immediacy.
otakucode 9y ago
You never should have relied on trust in the first place. Claims stand or fall on their rational consistency and correlation with reality. Nothing else.

kickling 9y ago

It's probably a good thing, at least on the Internet.

landryraccoon 9y ago

Does trust mean automatically taking for granted the truth of anonymous statements you read online? If so that trust never should have existed in the first place, and it should be gone forever.

aoeusnth1 9y ago
Not taken as truth, but taken as in good faith by default. The amount of manipulative and dishonest content has gone up quite a bit.
- RyanZAG 9y ago
  Has it gone up, or have you only been made aware of it now?
golergka 9y ago
That's exactly what was written on 4chan's /b/ for years. Despite having a ridiculous reputation, this place was always excellent at helping it's users develop the right attitude toward internet in general: don't trust anyone, don't let your emotions take control, and don't be so damn serious.
- watwut 9y ago
  The last descriptor I would use for 4chan is "cold calm rational".
  - golergka 9y ago
    You clearly haven't spent enough time on it - that's exactly the qualities that it trains within you, although the method it uses is kinda harsh.
    - watwut 9y ago
      It is a place where people go to with their uncontrolled emotional outbursts. Which is their thing when those outbursts don't have impact on rest of the world and really not fine when it leaks outside. Yes, swear words lost all their meaning for many on 4chan. That does not make people using them any more rational.
      - forgottenpass 9y ago
        It's not about sharpening your wits thorough osmosis, it's about seeing nonsense laid bare at your feet. Leveraging that to see through the pretense of "smarter" conversation to understand it's the exact same stuff: shit-flinging, misleading but plausible half-lies, active propaganda, underinformed dummies thinking they're having a deep conversation, etc... The zen that parent poster describes comes when you recognize that your favorite political commentator, or the thing your best friend just said over coffee are not inherently smarter or dumber than 4chan. edit: w/r/t "leaking outside.": The problem isn't that Trump was meme-ed into the whitehouse. The problem is that paternalistic control of messaging will never equip the populace to evaluate something as nonsense when the parents aren't around to stop the message from propagating.
        watwut 9y ago
        By leaking outside I meant a.) coordinated harassment b.) people being shocked that the rest of world does not share 4chan habits and culture - including channers being honestly shocked that people react negatively to unrelated Hitler meme used as argument and not taking author as some king of genius for that. Because channer using hitler and nazi symbolism did not even realized what those things means or were (except general understanding that it was something edgy). I don't really think Trump got to white house bc 4chan, I believe his voters voted him because he represents them as he is.

joe_the_user 9y ago

Personally, I can use Google to double check claims fairly easily. I actually have given up a lot of urban-myth beliefs that were wide-spread in even the 90s. I regularly check and flag false or dubious claims friend's posts on Facebook (where I'd say Facebook gets a bum-rap in some ways because friends can point out fake stuff). As far as not knowing where a given post comes from, that's OK if you are careful in your double checking. But the opposite pole is people who don't care whether what they post is true. Usually I and those people go separate ways. So the ultimate thing is naturally the bifurcation of online communities, with some portion becoming highly partisan and willing to repeat fake info simply to serve a given pole of opinion (not necessarily "extreme").

zaarn 9y ago
Careful of fact checking with Google, it can easily validate something as truth that isn't. The best option is to usually include the keyword "study" and actively look for only that data.
- joe_the_user 9y ago
  Perhaps I made a mistake in supposing that someone would take "using Google" as "search until I found several studies or good discussions on a given topic, compare the data, the arguments, the point of view and so-forth of each study then come to a conclusion" rather than, say, using Google's auto-generated answers to a few topic.

zeth___ 9y ago

>Unfortunately these days we're forced to consider the possibility that even your post is part of a professional manipulation campaign. Or mine. Or every other post out here. The only way to beat this is to have an end goal that is objectively good regardless of who says it. Bringing the first amendment into the 21st century and forcing corporations with open access discussion systems to be treated like government entities is a win for everyone. After all the first amendment in it's original form only stopped the federal government from imprisoning you before you said something, not after, and had nothing at all to say about what states governments could or couldn't do.

bilbo0s 9y ago
The First Amendment doesn't beat professional manipulation campaigns, it facilitates them. I've realized recently that the goood thing about the First Amendment is that it leads to an electorate that is as jaded as myself. One that views every Facebook, or HN, or internet post as potentially part of a state sponsored manipulation campaign.
- nugi 9y ago
  So the 1st is bad because it makes you have to think?

pervycreeper 9y ago

Is there a way to combat this phenomenon (generally: bad faith posting) with technical means?

csanch4 9y ago

This is such a lazy/defeatist statement. I'm hoping you still know that, in the midst of all this noise, facts and truths continue to exist -- so do well-informed opinions that can be fact-checked. Also, accepting this holier than thou persona from televised/printed "professional" media is being ignorant to their adoption of sensationalism and immediacy.

otakucode 9y ago

You never should have relied on trust in the first place. Claims stand or fall on their rational consistency and correlation with reality. Nothing else.