6 ms·

> For better or worse, we can expect further blurring of many conventional boundaries—between work and home, between “amateurs” and professionals, and between p

> For better or worse, we can expect further blurring of many conventional boundaries—between work and home, between “amateurs” and professionals, and between public and private. Recently having a child, I'm definitely finding this blurring of amateurs and pros to be true. There's so many blogs and sites that say different things, it's hard to know what or who to believe. I wish there were just one highly-regarded expert source so that I could just go with what they say and not have to research every little thing.

formalsystems 6y ago
If you consider the Bloomberg article on SuperMicro, they repeatedly claim expert/insider sources corroborate their version of the story, and have issued no retraction after their story was thoroughly debunked. While this certainly reflects poorly on Bloomberg, it reflects most on the journalistic standards of the article's authors. I don't think we will ever have a world where authoritative sources exist, since there can always be elements within the source of authority willing to bend the truth for more clicks.
- salawat 6y ago
  This makes sense if you remember that one of Bloomberg's reason to exist is to report news that moves markets. Truth or lies, it gets said all the same. Funny how prescient The Protomen seem to be.
  - jdsully 6y ago
    Seems an uncharitable interpretation. I would regard that more as a guide to the type of news they want their reporters to focus on - and what their audience wants to read. As far as corporate goals go its actually pretty specific and measurable.
- jjeaff 6y ago
  I think there is still something to that story. The authors involved are pretty good journalists from what I hear. I think that the coincidence of the US government's efforts to sanction chinese companies is a little suspect.
  - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
    I'm also suspicious of the coincidence, but an organized disinformation attempt explains it just as well as a real event.
    - jjeaff 6y ago
      Yes, that is what I was alluding to. Which in that case, takes some of the onus off of the reporters and the paper, I think.
Thev00d00 6y ago
As another recent parent I absolutely agree, add in to the mix to Google any possible answer you want to see and it becomes pretty useless as a resource. I have given up on the internet for parenting information except for healthcare provider information.
- giantg2 6y ago
  I've seen my share if incompetent healthcare providers. Better to do your own research. Instead of Google, use PubMed.
  - faitswulff 6y ago
    As a parent, there are so many things like "my child is hunching during breastfeeding, what does that mean?" or "why is baby choking during sleep" that you will find absolutely nothing on PubMed for.
    - giantg2 6y ago
      I'm just saying to verify what your provider tells you.
- jjeaff 6y ago
  Ya, there is so much information on raising kids that is just pulled out of thin air. So I started pretty much ignoring anything I see online unless it is accompanied with studies that are done on largish sample sizes.
AlexTWithBeard 6y ago
With rearing a child, as stupid as it may sound, trust your gut. If something feels wrong - it probably is. Other than that - don't worry: the best parent is a happy parent. I was surprised to find out how many "child rearing" experts do not eat their own dog food or have no children altogether.
- Andrex 6y ago
  > With rearing a child, as stupid as it may sound, trust your gut. If something feels wrong - it probably is. This feels like dangerous advice re: vaccinations.
  - eric_h 6y ago
    I believe the parent is presuming a higher base level of rationality in GP's "gut" than that of the population-at-large. While I'm not a parent, I'm certain that my "gut" would tell me that vaccinating my child is the opposite of wrong, however unpleasant for the child it might seem at the time. Of course, having watched friends become parents it's also quite clear that becoming a parent changes one's brain in some fundamental ways so it's possible you have a point ;)
    - Andrex 6y ago
      I accept the downvotes but I still feel like "by-the-gut" parenting has serious downsides that shouldn't be overlooked. It's possible being homosexual and raised in a conservative household has influenced that opinion, though.
      - pstuart 6y ago
        Agreed. One should trust one's gut if it is trustworthy. Dunning-Kruger makes this advice moot ;-)
  - AlexTWithBeard 6y ago
    Could you please elaborate a little bit? Which of the following do you see being dangerous: (a) ignoring achievements of modern science which can cure almost anything or (b) injecting a foreign substance into a bloodstream of otherwise healthy child in order to prevent a non-deadly decease this child will likely never have?
drfuchs 6y ago
Compare this to how it was pre-web: Just in time for the post-war baby boom, Dr. Benjamin Spock's "Baby and Child Care" was new parents' single go-to source of information for decades; selling over 50 million copies, it is one of the most popular books ever. His name recognition was exceedingly high; he'd regularly be mentioned on news and political shows, as well as in jokes on Laugh-In etc. The point being, you're certainly demonstrating an example of the recent trend where "voice of authority" is giving way to "the very notion of an expert is an elitist concept." Then again, maybe Spock is the explanation of all that ails us boomers?
agumonkey 6y ago
I have this view that the previous era of social structure was crafted through long trickles of actual know-how. This made the authority feels a bit stiff, but with the new open land of interwebs we're seeing how a "fluid" variant is mostly good to drown in. ps: side note, I tried to leverage access to direct science (pubmed and similar) and I was quite surprised that the struggle you describe for mundane topics (no offense to your family) is similar in deep research. A gazillions of publications all talking about similar things but with various conclusions and a lot of maybes. I kinda saw that human society is that thin autofocus line between high education doubts and high ignorance. We live in the 'field tested' middle ground which is not truer, just more agreed upon.
bjelkeman-again 6y ago
> I wish there were just one highly-regarded expert source so that I could just go with what they say and not have to research every little thing. I find the same with different subjects matters. Something I really needed to dive into, fish farming, in the end resulted in me taking a one year vocational course. That was a good expert source. Another thing I do, is work with recording music, as an amateur. Again a subject with tons of information available, most of it is poor IMHO. I know a vocational course would help, but most materials for this is not available publicly. It frustrates me that a lot of school material, paid for by the government, is behind a gatekeeper. Not sure how to solve that.
Schroedingers2c 6y ago
A few decent/expert/well researched sources ordered roughly (and subjectively) by unbiasedness: https://ourworldindata.org/ https://ourworldindata.org/ https://aeon.co/ https://aeon.co/ https://psyche.co/ https://psyche.co/ https://www.economist.com/ https://www.economist.com/ https://www.zeit.de/index https://www.zeit.de/index (for German speakers)

formalsystems 6y ago

If you consider the Bloomberg article on SuperMicro, they repeatedly claim expert/insider sources corroborate their version of the story, and have issued no retraction after their story was thoroughly debunked. While this certainly reflects poorly on Bloomberg, it reflects most on the journalistic standards of the article's authors. I don't think we will ever have a world where authoritative sources exist, since there can always be elements within the source of authority willing to bend the truth for more clicks.

salawat 6y ago
This makes sense if you remember that one of Bloomberg's reason to exist is to report news that moves markets. Truth or lies, it gets said all the same. Funny how prescient The Protomen seem to be.
- jdsully 6y ago
  Seems an uncharitable interpretation. I would regard that more as a guide to the type of news they want their reporters to focus on - and what their audience wants to read. As far as corporate goals go its actually pretty specific and measurable.
jjeaff 6y ago
I think there is still something to that story. The authors involved are pretty good journalists from what I hear. I think that the coincidence of the US government's efforts to sanction chinese companies is a little suspect.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  I'm also suspicious of the coincidence, but an organized disinformation attempt explains it just as well as a real event.
  - jjeaff 6y ago
    Yes, that is what I was alluding to. Which in that case, takes some of the onus off of the reporters and the paper, I think.

Thev00d00 6y ago

As another recent parent I absolutely agree, add in to the mix to Google any possible answer you want to see and it becomes pretty useless as a resource. I have given up on the internet for parenting information except for healthcare provider information.

giantg2 6y ago
I've seen my share if incompetent healthcare providers. Better to do your own research. Instead of Google, use PubMed.
- faitswulff 6y ago
  As a parent, there are so many things like "my child is hunching during breastfeeding, what does that mean?" or "why is baby choking during sleep" that you will find absolutely nothing on PubMed for.
  - giantg2 6y ago
    I'm just saying to verify what your provider tells you.
jjeaff 6y ago
Ya, there is so much information on raising kids that is just pulled out of thin air. So I started pretty much ignoring anything I see online unless it is accompanied with studies that are done on largish sample sizes.

AlexTWithBeard 6y ago

With rearing a child, as stupid as it may sound, trust your gut. If something feels wrong - it probably is. Other than that - don't worry: the best parent is a happy parent. I was surprised to find out how many "child rearing" experts do not eat their own dog food or have no children altogether.

Andrex 6y ago
> With rearing a child, as stupid as it may sound, trust your gut. If something feels wrong - it probably is. This feels like dangerous advice re: vaccinations.
- eric_h 6y ago
  I believe the parent is presuming a higher base level of rationality in GP's "gut" than that of the population-at-large. While I'm not a parent, I'm certain that my "gut" would tell me that vaccinating my child is the opposite of wrong, however unpleasant for the child it might seem at the time. Of course, having watched friends become parents it's also quite clear that becoming a parent changes one's brain in some fundamental ways so it's possible you have a point ;)
  - Andrex 6y ago
    I accept the downvotes but I still feel like "by-the-gut" parenting has serious downsides that shouldn't be overlooked. It's possible being homosexual and raised in a conservative household has influenced that opinion, though.
    - pstuart 6y ago
      Agreed. One should trust one's gut if it is trustworthy. Dunning-Kruger makes this advice moot ;-)
- AlexTWithBeard 6y ago
  Could you please elaborate a little bit? Which of the following do you see being dangerous: (a) ignoring achievements of modern science which can cure almost anything or (b) injecting a foreign substance into a bloodstream of otherwise healthy child in order to prevent a non-deadly decease this child will likely never have?

drfuchs 6y ago

Compare this to how it was pre-web: Just in time for the post-war baby boom, Dr. Benjamin Spock's "Baby and Child Care" was new parents' single go-to source of information for decades; selling over 50 million copies, it is one of the most popular books ever. His name recognition was exceedingly high; he'd regularly be mentioned on news and political shows, as well as in jokes on Laugh-In etc. The point being, you're certainly demonstrating an example of the recent trend where "voice of authority" is giving way to "the very notion of an expert is an elitist concept." Then again, maybe Spock is the explanation of all that ails us boomers?

agumonkey 6y ago

I have this view that the previous era of social structure was crafted through long trickles of actual know-how. This made the authority feels a bit stiff, but with the new open land of interwebs we're seeing how a "fluid" variant is mostly good to drown in. ps: side note, I tried to leverage access to direct science (pubmed and similar) and I was quite surprised that the struggle you describe for mundane topics (no offense to your family) is similar in deep research. A gazillions of publications all talking about similar things but with various conclusions and a lot of maybes. I kinda saw that human society is that thin autofocus line between high education doubts and high ignorance. We live in the 'field tested' middle ground which is not truer, just more agreed upon.

bjelkeman-again 6y ago

> I wish there were just one highly-regarded expert source so that I could just go with what they say and not have to research every little thing. I find the same with different subjects matters. Something I really needed to dive into, fish farming, in the end resulted in me taking a one year vocational course. That was a good expert source. Another thing I do, is work with recording music, as an amateur. Again a subject with tons of information available, most of it is poor IMHO. I know a vocational course would help, but most materials for this is not available publicly. It frustrates me that a lot of school material, paid for by the government, is behind a gatekeeper. Not sure how to solve that.

Schroedingers2c 6y ago

A few decent/expert/well researched sources ordered roughly (and subjectively) by unbiasedness: https://ourworldindata.org/ https://ourworldindata.org/ https://aeon.co/ https://aeon.co/ https://psyche.co/ https://psyche.co/ https://www.economist.com/ https://www.economist.com/ https://www.zeit.de/index https://www.zeit.de/index (for German speakers)