4 ms·

Is this appalling? What's appalling to me is the number of people who can't tell the difference between fantasy and reality. I'm sure governments are going to

by dfxm12 9y ago

Is this appalling? What's appalling to me is the number of people who can't tell the difference between fantasy and reality. I'm sure governments are going to come down hard on Zuck for "allowing disinformation to be spread", but won't give a second thought about cutting education budgets. It's hard for politicians to make it illegal to lie or to run a platform where people might lie. People are always going to lie and try to deceive others. It would be more effective for these politicians to actually educate their constituents. This is just one of many benefits of having educated citizenry...

vthallam 9y ago
Educating people definitely helps. But even the most educated one's could give into impulse and get triggered to false propaganda.
wmeredith 9y ago
> I'm sure governments are going to come down hard on Zuck for "allowing disinformation to be spread", but won't give a second thought about cutting education budgets. Prevention is always cheaper than treatment, but much harder to get people to understand the value of because the threat isn't in front of them.
Jach 9y ago
How's that pottery class that's getting cut going to help people tell the difference between fantasy and reality? Is it possible in your philosophy for two "educated" people to disagree? On more than just personal preference like whether blue is better than green, but indeed on seemingly foundational issues like what is real and what is imaginary?
- dfxm12 9y ago
  What's a theoretical pottery class got to do with this? Feel free to look up why teachers are currently on strike in parts of the US, or why the current US secretary of education is so controversial. This has been a problem for a good long while. I'm not talking about educated people agreeing or disagreeing, I'm not sure where you're going with that. I'm talking about leaving people with the skills to tell the difference between something reported as fact and an opinion. It's about knowing how to verify, or debunk, claims presented without evidence. It's about being able to detect complete fabrication. After all, what "educated" people thought Pizzagate was real?
  - Jach 9y ago
    The theoretical pottery class is the practical result of what happens when education budgets are reduced. Something has to go, so it's typically the optional electives with higher-than-normal base costs and average-or-less college prep relevance like pottery, shop, dance, etc. Still, is this a great loss in terms of preparing people to distinguish reality? If not, why is cutting education spending such a big problem? Basically I'm asking you to define "education" and why the solution to so many problems is simply more of it. After all, what "educated" people thought Christ was crucified and then resurrected?
    - dfxm12 9y ago
      The theoretical pottery class is the practical result of what happens when education budgets are reduced. Ok, you're arguing on a false premise then. When education budgets are reduced, kids don't have up to date textbooks. Classrooms don't have proper supplies and too many kids get crammed into too few classrooms, which is not a situation conducive to teaching or learning.
      - Jach 9y ago
        I don't see how it's an argument from a false premise given that I'm just asking questions and hoping for some conversation, not making a formal argument yet. Still, suppose you are inferring an argument I'm making ulteriorly through my questions, and have inferred that I've argued "reducing budgets implies only such classes are cut", then sure, that's technically false. But I'm not making that argument, ulteriorly or otherwise. In my followup I thought I sufficiently clarified that things like pottery and other classes being cut are typical examples of what goes, as something must, but of course not the only things. (And of course necessarily, if such things are already gone, something else must go, like small class sizes.) This is a whole side-show commentary however. My main line of questioning remains: how do you define education and in what way does lacking it matter for the purposes you claim to care about (being able to distinguish reality and fantasy)? Do you want to even venture at broaching the religious question? I'm ok with leaving that to the side. Maybe we can start with the downsides you've extracted out. What subjects are the important ones for which kids must have up to date textbooks in-class, the lack of which will hurt them in distinguishing reality and fantasy? What supplies are proper? What are some objective impacts to learning something when there are student-teacher ratios of 10:1 vs 20:1 vs 50:1? Does the extent of the impact matter by subject? (For the last I'd bet yes given many well funded universities have ratios in the hundreds for certain courses with apparently few if any seriously ill effects.) (To head off another possible point of miscommunication, I don't dispute that nebulous unfactored "education" can have more benefits than just distinguishing reality and fantasy and that various positive aspects might not impact that particular aspect at all, I just want to target that particular one for what you'd like to focus on when "more education" is pumped in, either by the schools that are having their budgets reduced or by the politicians themselves. Maybe that's another form of the question to ask instead? How specifically do you expect the ideal politician to education their constituents (and what's the ideal educator:educatee ratio?))
leggomylibro 9y ago
It can be easy for some people to forget that most people are generally spiteful, vindictive, petty jerks who can't look past the chips on their own shoulders and only rarely act kindly towards people who they want something from. It's not that people don't deserve compassion and empathy, but don't ever expect positive things from others if you want to avoid spending your life perpetually disappointed.
- wccrawford 9y ago
  Most people? No. But there are enough "spiteful, vindictive, petty jerks" out there that they need to be taken into consideration.
  - leggomylibro 9y ago
    Well, I envy you your life experience but that doesn't look like the case from my viewpoint.
pdonis 9y ago
> It would be more effective for these politicians to actually educate their constituents. Why would politicians want to educate their constituents, when it's so much easier to get reelected by uneducated ones?
nontechdude1 9y ago
Oh give me a break. What Russia did was "inbound marketing" to stump for Trump. It worked remarkably. They did a viral campaign, the exact thing social media is designed for. There are no safeguards against misrepresentation, bots, etc. This is squarely Facebook's fault. They had completely vulnerable systems in spite of being a source for news and information for hundreds of millions of americans. If we didn't have the DMCA they should and would probably be shut down.

by dfxm12 9y ago

vthallam 9y ago

Educating people definitely helps. But even the most educated one's could give into impulse and get triggered to false propaganda.

wmeredith 9y ago

> I'm sure governments are going to come down hard on Zuck for "allowing disinformation to be spread", but won't give a second thought about cutting education budgets. Prevention is always cheaper than treatment, but much harder to get people to understand the value of because the threat isn't in front of them.

Jach 9y ago

How's that pottery class that's getting cut going to help people tell the difference between fantasy and reality? Is it possible in your philosophy for two "educated" people to disagree? On more than just personal preference like whether blue is better than green, but indeed on seemingly foundational issues like what is real and what is imaginary?

dfxm12 9y ago
What's a theoretical pottery class got to do with this? Feel free to look up why teachers are currently on strike in parts of the US, or why the current US secretary of education is so controversial. This has been a problem for a good long while. I'm not talking about educated people agreeing or disagreeing, I'm not sure where you're going with that. I'm talking about leaving people with the skills to tell the difference between something reported as fact and an opinion. It's about knowing how to verify, or debunk, claims presented without evidence. It's about being able to detect complete fabrication. After all, what "educated" people thought Pizzagate was real?
- Jach 9y ago
  The theoretical pottery class is the practical result of what happens when education budgets are reduced. Something has to go, so it's typically the optional electives with higher-than-normal base costs and average-or-less college prep relevance like pottery, shop, dance, etc. Still, is this a great loss in terms of preparing people to distinguish reality? If not, why is cutting education spending such a big problem? Basically I'm asking you to define "education" and why the solution to so many problems is simply more of it. After all, what "educated" people thought Christ was crucified and then resurrected?
  - dfxm12 9y ago
    The theoretical pottery class is the practical result of what happens when education budgets are reduced. Ok, you're arguing on a false premise then. When education budgets are reduced, kids don't have up to date textbooks. Classrooms don't have proper supplies and too many kids get crammed into too few classrooms, which is not a situation conducive to teaching or learning.
    - Jach 9y ago
      I don't see how it's an argument from a false premise given that I'm just asking questions and hoping for some conversation, not making a formal argument yet. Still, suppose you are inferring an argument I'm making ulteriorly through my questions, and have inferred that I've argued "reducing budgets implies only such classes are cut", then sure, that's technically false. But I'm not making that argument, ulteriorly or otherwise. In my followup I thought I sufficiently clarified that things like pottery and other classes being cut are typical examples of what goes, as something must, but of course not the only things. (And of course necessarily, if such things are already gone, something else must go, like small class sizes.) This is a whole side-show commentary however. My main line of questioning remains: how do you define education and in what way does lacking it matter for the purposes you claim to care about (being able to distinguish reality and fantasy)? Do you want to even venture at broaching the religious question? I'm ok with leaving that to the side. Maybe we can start with the downsides you've extracted out. What subjects are the important ones for which kids must have up to date textbooks in-class, the lack of which will hurt them in distinguishing reality and fantasy? What supplies are proper? What are some objective impacts to learning something when there are student-teacher ratios of 10:1 vs 20:1 vs 50:1? Does the extent of the impact matter by subject? (For the last I'd bet yes given many well funded universities have ratios in the hundreds for certain courses with apparently few if any seriously ill effects.) (To head off another possible point of miscommunication, I don't dispute that nebulous unfactored "education" can have more benefits than just distinguishing reality and fantasy and that various positive aspects might not impact that particular aspect at all, I just want to target that particular one for what you'd like to focus on when "more education" is pumped in, either by the schools that are having their budgets reduced or by the politicians themselves. Maybe that's another form of the question to ask instead? How specifically do you expect the ideal politician to education their constituents (and what's the ideal educator:educatee ratio?))

leggomylibro 9y ago

It can be easy for some people to forget that most people are generally spiteful, vindictive, petty jerks who can't look past the chips on their own shoulders and only rarely act kindly towards people who they want something from. It's not that people don't deserve compassion and empathy, but don't ever expect positive things from others if you want to avoid spending your life perpetually disappointed.

wccrawford 9y ago
Most people? No. But there are enough "spiteful, vindictive, petty jerks" out there that they need to be taken into consideration.
- leggomylibro 9y ago
  Well, I envy you your life experience but that doesn't look like the case from my viewpoint.

pdonis 9y ago

> It would be more effective for these politicians to actually educate their constituents. Why would politicians want to educate their constituents, when it's so much easier to get reelected by uneducated ones?

nontechdude1 9y ago

Oh give me a break. What Russia did was "inbound marketing" to stump for Trump. It worked remarkably. They did a viral campaign, the exact thing social media is designed for. There are no safeguards against misrepresentation, bots, etc. This is squarely Facebook's fault. They had completely vulnerable systems in spite of being a source for news and information for hundreds of millions of americans. If we didn't have the DMCA they should and would probably be shut down.