6 ms·

> , a researcher looking into COVID conspiracies can determine when the conspiracy began, who is leading the conversation, and which news stories, blog posts, a

> , a researcher looking into COVID conspiracies can determine when the conspiracy began, who is leading the conversation, and which news stories, blog posts, and other links are appearing most frequently in the online conversation. Considering what's been happening in Melbourne, where people are being arrested for suggesting a peaceful protest, i think software such as this will only help speed up the polarisation process. The end result will be more police leaning on the necks of people who are only "political" criminals. I also noticed the word "disinformation" which in itself these days is rather politically polarising. What's wrong in the world where open and balanced conversation must not be allowed?

glial 6y ago
'Balanced' is a red herring and useless in-and-of itself. Conversation should be a collaboration to find the truth, not a 'balanced' battle between two opponents. Bullshit on the internet doesn't further the goal of finding the truth or arriving at consensus.
- mistermann 6y ago
  One complication might be that "bullshit" and various other rhetorical techniques are often used to dismiss truths that one has no interest in pondering, and this may not always be a conscious and intentional action. Of course there are obvious problems with this as well ("it takes 10x as much energy to refute bullshit than it does to spew it, etc"), but I think there is value in acknowledging the possibility that all humans aren't nearly as good at discerning truth as they perceive. Most people seem to get agitated rather quickly even at a topic-agnostic abstract discussion about our ability to discern truth.
  - Barrin92 6y ago
    Most of the bullshit that is circulating on the internet at the moment, for example as it relates to the pandemic say is balls to the wall craziness along the lines of bill gates inserting microchips in your brain or 5G infecting you with a virus, or you suffocating from wearing a mask. It's not like we're talking about any sophisticated philosophizing here, the real danger from misinformation on the internet at the moment is the lowest of lowbrow garbage spread at extremely high velocity at virtually no cost.
    - mistermann 6y ago
      > Most of the bullshit... Bullshit according to who (which is my point)? > along the lines of bill gates inserting microchips in your brain or 5G infecting you with a virus, or you suffocating from wearing a mask There is some of this, yes. But then there are also questions regarding financial motives behind vaccines, and the unusual manner in which statistics are reported, and why certain portions of reality shall not be discussed, and so forth and so on. Lots of people assert that these ideas are also "bullshit", but if you ask for evidence substantiating that assertion, they often behave as if the notion that assertions should require evidence is absurd (while simultaneously criticizing conspiracy theorists for asserting things without evidence). > It's not like we're talking about any sophisticated philosophizing here I don't think philosophers would agree that epistemology is simple - that it often seems to invoke such strong emotions in people suggests that it is anything but. It has a dependency on human cognition, which is fairly well known to be a less than perfect platform in many ways. > the real danger from misinformation on the internet at the moment is the lowest of lowbrow garbage spread at extremely high velocity at virtually no cost. This is surely "a" danger, but whether it is "the" (main) danger is necessarily speculative, as it has a dependency on the future, which is unknown.
      - Barrin92 6y ago
        >Bullshit according to who (which is my point)? Really anyone with five braincells. Can someone explain to me why Hackernews and much of the rest of the internet, has descended into this nihilistic relativism where acknowleding even basic, empirical reality has apparently become impossible? Viral diseases aren't spread through radiowaves. That's not a matter of opinion, that's a fact. Of course a significant portion of people might be so scientifically illiterate they cannot figure that out, that doesn't change the fact that it's not true. This constant childish "hey but how do you know that this is true buddy" talk around misinformation and information is really driving me nuts.
        ColanR 6y ago
        > Really anyone with five braincells....a significant portion of people might be so scientifically illiterate they cannot figure that out Per the HN guidelines: "Don't be snarky...Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community." > Viral diseases aren't spread through radiowaves. You're clearly not responding to the parent, since they weren't defending that. It would be more interesting if you responded to the not-so-strawman position they actually represented. > This constant childish "hey but how do you know that this is true buddy" talk around misinformation and information is really driving me nuts. It drives me nuts, too, when people refuse to consider alternative perspectives because the source seems tainted.
  - glial 6y ago
    Yes, the last sentence in my comment was unnecessarily provocative and I should have left it out because it distracts from my larger point, about which I think we agree. Humans are not good at discerning truth on their own, and we need social institutions that help us collaborate to find it, rather than turn the endeavor into a spectacle.
    - mistermann 6y ago
      I can get on board with us needing help to learn how to discern fact from fiction, but considering the amount of people with post-secondary education who seem utterly helpless I don't feel like the universities are the place to turn, I certainly don't trust the government to come up with a trustworthy system (I'm suspicious if such a thing is aligned with their true interests), so I'm not sure how we find our way out of the corner we've painted ourselves into. And ever present in the background is China, who due to strict control of speech seem to have very few problems like us. Evolution being amoral, I'm a bit worried that their restrictive approach might end up being selected for fitness.
- apostacy 6y ago
  Telling people to buy a mask last February was dangerous misinformation that threatened to cause a panic. Facebook expat groups in China were trying to get the word out, and were deleted with extreme prejudice. Obviously, they were right, and Facebook was wrong. Stuff that was labeled as fake news bullshit was actually the truth. After all of this, how can you ever trust these companies to decide for you what the truth is? How can you ever trust Facebook again?
- raxxorrax 6y ago
  Declaring "bullshit on the internet" to be an existential danger is bullshit. We would all be dead already.
  - glial 6y ago
    That’s not what I said.
chrisweekly 6y ago
> "I also noticed the word "disinformation" which in itself these days is rather politically polarising. What's wrong in the world where open and balanced conversation must not be allowed?" Weaponized Social Media has become a very real, powerful, dangerous and global force. I'm sure there are other materials I could cite, but the recent Netfix film "The Social Dilemma" (esp the 2nd half) paints the picture very clearly.
raxxorrax 6y ago
I don't think fact checkers were in any way successful. They have immediately been abused for partisan issues. Not by outright lies, but careful framing evading truth like champions. The COVID disinformation craze is just embarrassing.

glial 6y ago

'Balanced' is a red herring and useless in-and-of itself. Conversation should be a collaboration to find the truth, not a 'balanced' battle between two opponents. Bullshit on the internet doesn't further the goal of finding the truth or arriving at consensus.

mistermann 6y ago
One complication might be that "bullshit" and various other rhetorical techniques are often used to dismiss truths that one has no interest in pondering, and this may not always be a conscious and intentional action. Of course there are obvious problems with this as well ("it takes 10x as much energy to refute bullshit than it does to spew it, etc"), but I think there is value in acknowledging the possibility that all humans aren't nearly as good at discerning truth as they perceive. Most people seem to get agitated rather quickly even at a topic-agnostic abstract discussion about our ability to discern truth.
- Barrin92 6y ago
  Most of the bullshit that is circulating on the internet at the moment, for example as it relates to the pandemic say is balls to the wall craziness along the lines of bill gates inserting microchips in your brain or 5G infecting you with a virus, or you suffocating from wearing a mask. It's not like we're talking about any sophisticated philosophizing here, the real danger from misinformation on the internet at the moment is the lowest of lowbrow garbage spread at extremely high velocity at virtually no cost.
  - mistermann 6y ago
    > Most of the bullshit... Bullshit according to who (which is my point)? > along the lines of bill gates inserting microchips in your brain or 5G infecting you with a virus, or you suffocating from wearing a mask There is some of this, yes. But then there are also questions regarding financial motives behind vaccines, and the unusual manner in which statistics are reported, and why certain portions of reality shall not be discussed, and so forth and so on. Lots of people assert that these ideas are also "bullshit", but if you ask for evidence substantiating that assertion, they often behave as if the notion that assertions should require evidence is absurd (while simultaneously criticizing conspiracy theorists for asserting things without evidence). > It's not like we're talking about any sophisticated philosophizing here I don't think philosophers would agree that epistemology is simple - that it often seems to invoke such strong emotions in people suggests that it is anything but. It has a dependency on human cognition, which is fairly well known to be a less than perfect platform in many ways. > the real danger from misinformation on the internet at the moment is the lowest of lowbrow garbage spread at extremely high velocity at virtually no cost. This is surely "a" danger, but whether it is "the" (main) danger is necessarily speculative, as it has a dependency on the future, which is unknown.
    - Barrin92 6y ago
      >Bullshit according to who (which is my point)? Really anyone with five braincells. Can someone explain to me why Hackernews and much of the rest of the internet, has descended into this nihilistic relativism where acknowleding even basic, empirical reality has apparently become impossible? Viral diseases aren't spread through radiowaves. That's not a matter of opinion, that's a fact. Of course a significant portion of people might be so scientifically illiterate they cannot figure that out, that doesn't change the fact that it's not true. This constant childish "hey but how do you know that this is true buddy" talk around misinformation and information is really driving me nuts.
      - ColanR 6y ago
        > Really anyone with five braincells....a significant portion of people might be so scientifically illiterate they cannot figure that out Per the HN guidelines: "Don't be snarky...Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community." > Viral diseases aren't spread through radiowaves. You're clearly not responding to the parent, since they weren't defending that. It would be more interesting if you responded to the not-so-strawman position they actually represented. > This constant childish "hey but how do you know that this is true buddy" talk around misinformation and information is really driving me nuts. It drives me nuts, too, when people refuse to consider alternative perspectives because the source seems tainted.
- glial 6y ago
  Yes, the last sentence in my comment was unnecessarily provocative and I should have left it out because it distracts from my larger point, about which I think we agree. Humans are not good at discerning truth on their own, and we need social institutions that help us collaborate to find it, rather than turn the endeavor into a spectacle.
  - mistermann 6y ago
    I can get on board with us needing help to learn how to discern fact from fiction, but considering the amount of people with post-secondary education who seem utterly helpless I don't feel like the universities are the place to turn, I certainly don't trust the government to come up with a trustworthy system (I'm suspicious if such a thing is aligned with their true interests), so I'm not sure how we find our way out of the corner we've painted ourselves into. And ever present in the background is China, who due to strict control of speech seem to have very few problems like us. Evolution being amoral, I'm a bit worried that their restrictive approach might end up being selected for fitness.
apostacy 6y ago
Telling people to buy a mask last February was dangerous misinformation that threatened to cause a panic. Facebook expat groups in China were trying to get the word out, and were deleted with extreme prejudice. Obviously, they were right, and Facebook was wrong. Stuff that was labeled as fake news bullshit was actually the truth. After all of this, how can you ever trust these companies to decide for you what the truth is? How can you ever trust Facebook again?
raxxorrax 6y ago
Declaring "bullshit on the internet" to be an existential danger is bullshit. We would all be dead already.
- glial 6y ago
  That’s not what I said.

chrisweekly 6y ago

> "I also noticed the word "disinformation" which in itself these days is rather politically polarising. What's wrong in the world where open and balanced conversation must not be allowed?" Weaponized Social Media has become a very real, powerful, dangerous and global force. I'm sure there are other materials I could cite, but the recent Netfix film "The Social Dilemma" (esp the 2nd half) paints the picture very clearly.

raxxorrax 6y ago

I don't think fact checkers were in any way successful. They have immediately been abused for partisan issues. Not by outright lies, but careful framing evading truth like champions. The COVID disinformation craze is just embarrassing.