3 ms·

It's not a religious position. It's a chain of trust, as an individual you can decide where that trust begins and ends for you, but it's impossible for you to

It's not a religious position. It's a chain of trust, as an individual you can decide where that trust begins and ends for you, but it's impossible for you to be at the forefront measuring every possible variable, and being an expert in every field, conducting analysis of the data. At some point you need to defer to people who know (or at least, you believe they know) more than you. It's like with our computers spying on us. Yes you can inspect the code, yes you can check the signatures of the code running on your machine match the code as listed, but then what of the OS, what of the drivers, what of the micro-code, firmware, hardware, etc etc. It's an impossible position to reason you out of, because you are living in a completely zero trust world.

feralimal 6y ago
Fair enough. But I don't trust. Can I know? If I cannot know, I will not trust. To trust would weaken me, and empower those who hide information to hide even more. This is where we are. I do live in a zero trust world. I trust government and corporations least of all. Individuals I have much more time for. Although zero trust was disconcerting at first, I also find it liberating. I know that there is lots I do not know. I'm not pretending to myself - holding beliefs as if they were knowledge, because of misplaced trust.
- Ixio 6y ago
  Do you grow your own food ? Where does your zero trust end ? Science is very difficult to cheat on such high visibility issues. There is a huge scientific consensus on climate change, from experts of all countries and diverse backgrounds. For it all to be a huge conspiracy seems like a pretty big leap of faith, that they are genuine is a simpler explanation.
  - feralimal 6y ago
    Science is incredibly easy to cheat. Everyone is silo'd and beholden to funding. That very few people speak up about it (why would they, when their jobs are at risk) means nothing. A really good example of someone speaking up, from a 'trusted' organisation, is this editorial in the British Medical Journal.
    - feralimal 6y ago
      aaand here's the link, sorry! editorial in the BMJ about covid: https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4425 https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4425

feralimal 6y ago

Fair enough. But I don't trust. Can I know? If I cannot know, I will not trust. To trust would weaken me, and empower those who hide information to hide even more. This is where we are. I do live in a zero trust world. I trust government and corporations least of all. Individuals I have much more time for. Although zero trust was disconcerting at first, I also find it liberating. I know that there is lots I do not know. I'm not pretending to myself - holding beliefs as if they were knowledge, because of misplaced trust.

Ixio 6y ago
Do you grow your own food ? Where does your zero trust end ? Science is very difficult to cheat on such high visibility issues. There is a huge scientific consensus on climate change, from experts of all countries and diverse backgrounds. For it all to be a huge conspiracy seems like a pretty big leap of faith, that they are genuine is a simpler explanation.
- feralimal 6y ago
  Science is incredibly easy to cheat. Everyone is silo'd and beholden to funding. That very few people speak up about it (why would they, when their jobs are at risk) means nothing. A really good example of someone speaking up, from a 'trusted' organisation, is this editorial in the British Medical Journal.
  - feralimal 6y ago
    aaand here's the link, sorry! editorial in the BMJ about covid: https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4425 https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4425