5 ms·

> I’m not hunting down original sources for everything I think I know, I’m mostly relying on gatekeepers (experts) to tell me what is true. Very honest! > As

> I’m not hunting down original sources for everything I think I know, I’m mostly relying on gatekeepers (experts) to tell me what is true. Very honest! > As much as it goes against my grain, I have to admit that society works better when the gatekeepers decide what the truth is, even though we know they don’t always get it right. No! They don't always get it right?! They are literally there to ensure you get it wrong! They really are. They are part of the governance structure - they will not tell you the way out of this situation, or give you good information. All I would say, is that you need to ensure that you act on what you know. Not on what you believe. Verify everything you accept as true or discard or assume it but be prepared to be corrected if you get better information. And if it turns out that you don't know a whole lot - that is fine! At least you're not acting incorrectly and causing problems! At the end of the day if you are acting on stuff that you don't know, you can inadvertently cause more harm, even though you mean well. You can be manipulated (easily) to go along with the crowd. All the best.

shadowgovt 6y ago
What is the benefit the governance structure derives from general misinformation on most topics? Governance is harder when people don't know things.
- feralimal 6y ago
  Think about it. If people have the wrong information, that means that they cannot respond meaningfully. If you are swimming in a world of lies, how will you give the correct answer? UPDATE/EDIT And, in other conspiracy news, I am unable to reply to comments below. "You're posting too fast. Please slow down. Thanks." This will probably prevent me from replying for a few hours (last time it was 3 hours). Understandably, people will think I'm flaky and unable to defend my position, where I am happy to have a meaningful interaction and share a different point of view. Ask yourself, should I be able to say what I have said, in a free society? Did you think HN wasn't part of the problem?
  - shadowgovt 6y ago
    If you're swimming in a world of lies, how do you feed yourself? Because not through government; they don't want that job. What do you imagine government's goal to be? Especially in a country like the US where half the elected are trying to shrink it? People believing lies led to a mob storming the US Congress. Do you think the goal of the people in government was to get lynched by a mob? (I use hacker news because it is moderated. That's not part of the problem)
    - feralimal 6y ago
      How do I feed myself? I don't know what you mean. Government's goal is to implement whatever governance is decided to be best to manage people. You say a mob stormed congress. I saw a dramatic event, that justifies a lot of authoritarian actions to be undertaken on others. Including de-platforming the president! Isn't that amazing? Other dramatic events are perfectly fine, of course, such as the BLM protests. Why is that? The answer for me is that some protests suit the governance agenda, and some don't. A message needs to be given to indicate rightthink and wrongthink. I think you must believe that the government (lights, camera) 'action' you see on TV are far more than a simple soap opera intended to distract you. Perhaps you believe that one side is 'good' and the other 'bad'. If that's it, you are falling for the good cop/bad cop routine, and being sold down the river by both sides. (I don't mind moderation - but what we have on HN is no room for free thinking, consensus opinion wins the day. Was I really posting too much, was I undertaking a DDOS attack? Or was my opinion, if reasoned, unpopular and not to be heard. Let me know.)
  - Guvante 6y ago
    You got caught by the spam filter dude. No conspiracy here.
    - feralimal 6y ago
      Its not a spam filter. I am not posting too fast in trying to reply to responses. The reason I am blocked is because my opinions are not popular and they are downvoted. This is the issue: HN is an echo chamber. Those who can downvote (those with 500+ upvotes) can downvote others and maintain the echo chamber. A function of the design is to take away the right of reply from those whose opinion they do not like.
netsharc 6y ago
> They are literally there to ensure you get it wrong! They really are. They are part of the governance structure - they will not tell you the way out of this situation, or give you good information. > Verify everything you accept as true Hah... so, did you verify this stuff about MSM being a force to mislead? The problem with the Internet nowadays is, it's already like a Library of Babel [0], if you want to have your views confirmed on anything, you can find someone saying "Yes, it's like that.". [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Library_of_Babel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Library_of_Babel
- feralimal 6y ago
  > Hah... so, did you verify this stuff about MSM being a force to mislead? Its obvious. If you look at what is presented, you are given lots of claims, but very few facts. Its just a load of evidence-free noise. What's to evaluate?! Seriously, look a little deeper at almost any article. There is no actual information there. The question you should ask - critically - is how do I know this to be true? And if you don't know it to be true, why do you believe it to be true anyway? UPDATE/EDIT And, in other conspiracy news, I am unable to reply to comments below. "You're posting too fast. Please slow down. Thanks." This will probably prevent me from replying for a few hours (last time it was 3 hours). Understandably, people will think I'm flaky and unable to defend my position, where I am happy to have a meaningful interaction and share a different point of view. Ask yourself, should I be able to say what I have said, in a free society? Did you think HN wasn't part of the problem?
  - throwaway201103 6y ago
    I've been reading a bit of Noam Chomsky this afternoon, not a person I'd agree with politically but many of his observations ring true regardless. "The key element of social control is the strategy of distraction that is to divert public attention from important issues and changes decided by political and economic elites, through the technique of flood or flooding continuous distractions and insignificant information."
  - netsharc 6y ago
    Hmm, how do you differentiate between claims and facts? What are facts other than just things where you can verify? Where you can think "Ok, I agree that this is true". Like 2 + 2 = 4. We probably can both verify this, so that's a fact. How about e = mc2 ? Well, it's stood the test of time and many physics professors saying what it means, so to me this is also a fact. Same with the fact that the earth is spherical; but if you talk to a flat-earther, they'll start saying all sorts of nonsense (at least to me) because they don't believe the hundreds of years of research, and "want to see it for themselves", and what they "see" is that the earth is flat (because they have confirmation bias) Yesterday MSM reported live as Trump supporters attacked the Capitol. I see that as factual information, there were thousands at a Trump rally nearby, presumably because they wanted to hear their leader talk; and nobody's said these people dispersed and a bunch of others came from the bushes... The media also said "x thousand more people died due to Covid-19 yesterday", here I do have implicit trust that the reporting is correct, then again they're just reporting numbers from government agencies. TBH I'm not that invested in this that I need to proof whether the number is correct or not, but that's the thing isn't it; a Covid-denier wants to think Covid is a lie, and therefore the number of deaths is a lie, because there's something in it for them, maybe it's because their business is currently shut down and their bank account is being drained and they're going to lose their house and go hungry soon..
neogodless 6y ago
We really need to slow down and examine our premises more carefully. 1. Gatekeepers (in this case, any media labeled "mainstream" and any popular social media corporation) exist to spread disinformation. 2. These gatekeepers are part of the government (or governance structure); they operate on the direction of the government. 3. They will not give you "good information." Any of them. All of this to argue that President Donald Trump, perhaps arguably the most powerful man when acting President is speaking the truth about widespread election fraud, which - in 2016 would make him look better, as he claimed he won the popular vote, and in 2020 would preserve his position of power and influence over you. To accept that lie, you need to believe that the vast majority of news outlets and social media corporations are all secretly conspiring, planning, communicating and executing alongside election officials, bipartisan judges, etc. and all at the behest of a "deep state" shadow government, but the only people that are willing to "admit" this exists are people that are Trump's biggest fans.
- feralimal 6y ago
  To me, it was always the case. I think TV was set up to be the most powerful propaganda delivery mechanism. That's pretty clear, when you look at how the BBC was created. But - for more info, so that you can confirm this is explicitly the case, you should look up 'Operation Mockingbird'. Or the way that the CIA sponsored arts and culture. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/modern-art-was-cia-weapon-1578808.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/modern-art-was-cia-... The media being part of governance is not a conspiracy. UPDATE/EDIT And, in other conspiracy news, I am unable to reply to comments below. "You're posting too fast. Please slow down. Thanks." This will probably prevent me from replying for a few hours (last time it was 3 hours). Understandably, people will think I'm flaky and unable to defend my position, where I am happy to have a meaningful interaction and share a different point of view. Ask yourself, should I be able to say what I have said, in a free society? Did you think HN wasn't part of the problem?
  - neogodless 6y ago
    > the CIA's secret campaign to turn American art into anti-Soviet cultural propaganda This is perfectly credible. But extrapolating that example of government influence over culture to the premise "media is 100% under the control and direction of the government" or, furthermore, a hidden or shadow government... is stretching well beyond a logical conclusion. (It would have to be a shadow government, because mainstream media and social media were not going along with the Republicans led by Trump, when they were in power over several branches of the U.S. government.) You need a lot more evidence to dispel the notion that this is "not a conspiracy."

shadowgovt 6y ago

What is the benefit the governance structure derives from general misinformation on most topics? Governance is harder when people don't know things.

feralimal 6y ago
Think about it. If people have the wrong information, that means that they cannot respond meaningfully. If you are swimming in a world of lies, how will you give the correct answer? UPDATE/EDIT And, in other conspiracy news, I am unable to reply to comments below. "You're posting too fast. Please slow down. Thanks." This will probably prevent me from replying for a few hours (last time it was 3 hours). Understandably, people will think I'm flaky and unable to defend my position, where I am happy to have a meaningful interaction and share a different point of view. Ask yourself, should I be able to say what I have said, in a free society? Did you think HN wasn't part of the problem?
- shadowgovt 6y ago
  If you're swimming in a world of lies, how do you feed yourself? Because not through government; they don't want that job. What do you imagine government's goal to be? Especially in a country like the US where half the elected are trying to shrink it? People believing lies led to a mob storming the US Congress. Do you think the goal of the people in government was to get lynched by a mob? (I use hacker news because it is moderated. That's not part of the problem)
  - feralimal 6y ago
    How do I feed myself? I don't know what you mean. Government's goal is to implement whatever governance is decided to be best to manage people. You say a mob stormed congress. I saw a dramatic event, that justifies a lot of authoritarian actions to be undertaken on others. Including de-platforming the president! Isn't that amazing? Other dramatic events are perfectly fine, of course, such as the BLM protests. Why is that? The answer for me is that some protests suit the governance agenda, and some don't. A message needs to be given to indicate rightthink and wrongthink. I think you must believe that the government (lights, camera) 'action' you see on TV are far more than a simple soap opera intended to distract you. Perhaps you believe that one side is 'good' and the other 'bad'. If that's it, you are falling for the good cop/bad cop routine, and being sold down the river by both sides. (I don't mind moderation - but what we have on HN is no room for free thinking, consensus opinion wins the day. Was I really posting too much, was I undertaking a DDOS attack? Or was my opinion, if reasoned, unpopular and not to be heard. Let me know.)
- Guvante 6y ago
  You got caught by the spam filter dude. No conspiracy here.
  - feralimal 6y ago
    Its not a spam filter. I am not posting too fast in trying to reply to responses. The reason I am blocked is because my opinions are not popular and they are downvoted. This is the issue: HN is an echo chamber. Those who can downvote (those with 500+ upvotes) can downvote others and maintain the echo chamber. A function of the design is to take away the right of reply from those whose opinion they do not like.

netsharc 6y ago

> They are literally there to ensure you get it wrong! They really are. They are part of the governance structure - they will not tell you the way out of this situation, or give you good information. > Verify everything you accept as true Hah... so, did you verify this stuff about MSM being a force to mislead? The problem with the Internet nowadays is, it's already like a Library of Babel [0], if you want to have your views confirmed on anything, you can find someone saying "Yes, it's like that.". [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Library_of_Babel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Library_of_Babel

feralimal 6y ago
> Hah... so, did you verify this stuff about MSM being a force to mislead? Its obvious. If you look at what is presented, you are given lots of claims, but very few facts. Its just a load of evidence-free noise. What's to evaluate?! Seriously, look a little deeper at almost any article. There is no actual information there. The question you should ask - critically - is how do I know this to be true? And if you don't know it to be true, why do you believe it to be true anyway? UPDATE/EDIT And, in other conspiracy news, I am unable to reply to comments below. "You're posting too fast. Please slow down. Thanks." This will probably prevent me from replying for a few hours (last time it was 3 hours). Understandably, people will think I'm flaky and unable to defend my position, where I am happy to have a meaningful interaction and share a different point of view. Ask yourself, should I be able to say what I have said, in a free society? Did you think HN wasn't part of the problem?
- throwaway201103 6y ago
  I've been reading a bit of Noam Chomsky this afternoon, not a person I'd agree with politically but many of his observations ring true regardless. "The key element of social control is the strategy of distraction that is to divert public attention from important issues and changes decided by political and economic elites, through the technique of flood or flooding continuous distractions and insignificant information."
- netsharc 6y ago
  Hmm, how do you differentiate between claims and facts? What are facts other than just things where you can verify? Where you can think "Ok, I agree that this is true". Like 2 + 2 = 4. We probably can both verify this, so that's a fact. How about e = mc2 ? Well, it's stood the test of time and many physics professors saying what it means, so to me this is also a fact. Same with the fact that the earth is spherical; but if you talk to a flat-earther, they'll start saying all sorts of nonsense (at least to me) because they don't believe the hundreds of years of research, and "want to see it for themselves", and what they "see" is that the earth is flat (because they have confirmation bias) Yesterday MSM reported live as Trump supporters attacked the Capitol. I see that as factual information, there were thousands at a Trump rally nearby, presumably because they wanted to hear their leader talk; and nobody's said these people dispersed and a bunch of others came from the bushes... The media also said "x thousand more people died due to Covid-19 yesterday", here I do have implicit trust that the reporting is correct, then again they're just reporting numbers from government agencies. TBH I'm not that invested in this that I need to proof whether the number is correct or not, but that's the thing isn't it; a Covid-denier wants to think Covid is a lie, and therefore the number of deaths is a lie, because there's something in it for them, maybe it's because their business is currently shut down and their bank account is being drained and they're going to lose their house and go hungry soon..

neogodless 6y ago

We really need to slow down and examine our premises more carefully. 1. Gatekeepers (in this case, any media labeled "mainstream" and any popular social media corporation) exist to spread disinformation. 2. These gatekeepers are part of the government (or governance structure); they operate on the direction of the government. 3. They will not give you "good information." Any of them. All of this to argue that President Donald Trump, perhaps arguably the most powerful man when acting President is speaking the truth about widespread election fraud, which - in 2016 would make him look better, as he claimed he won the popular vote, and in 2020 would preserve his position of power and influence over you. To accept that lie, you need to believe that the vast majority of news outlets and social media corporations are all secretly conspiring, planning, communicating and executing alongside election officials, bipartisan judges, etc. and all at the behest of a "deep state" shadow government, but the only people that are willing to "admit" this exists are people that are Trump's biggest fans.

feralimal 6y ago
To me, it was always the case. I think TV was set up to be the most powerful propaganda delivery mechanism. That's pretty clear, when you look at how the BBC was created. But - for more info, so that you can confirm this is explicitly the case, you should look up 'Operation Mockingbird'. Or the way that the CIA sponsored arts and culture. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/modern-art-was-cia-weapon-1578808.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/modern-art-was-cia-... The media being part of governance is not a conspiracy. UPDATE/EDIT And, in other conspiracy news, I am unable to reply to comments below. "You're posting too fast. Please slow down. Thanks." This will probably prevent me from replying for a few hours (last time it was 3 hours). Understandably, people will think I'm flaky and unable to defend my position, where I am happy to have a meaningful interaction and share a different point of view. Ask yourself, should I be able to say what I have said, in a free society? Did you think HN wasn't part of the problem?
- neogodless 6y ago
  > the CIA's secret campaign to turn American art into anti-Soviet cultural propaganda This is perfectly credible. But extrapolating that example of government influence over culture to the premise "media is 100% under the control and direction of the government" or, furthermore, a hidden or shadow government... is stretching well beyond a logical conclusion. (It would have to be a shadow government, because mainstream media and social media were not going along with the Republicans led by Trump, when they were in power over several branches of the U.S. government.) You need a lot more evidence to dispel the notion that this is "not a conspiracy."