42 ms·

Yes, because the trade off is worth it, and we should treat people like grownups who can think for themselves. Why not encourage critical thinking and wider rea

Yes, because the trade off is worth it, and we should treat people like grownups who can think for themselves. Why not encourage critical thinking and wider reading, instead of being the police of literally all the information on your giant social media platform?

kiba 6y ago
Critical thinking? The vast majority of useful information in the world is based on trust and authority, not on critical verification and people examining the evidence directly. Do you have any idea just how much work it is to verify that just the facts cited actually match up? That doesn't include verifying if the facts are accurate in and in itself. I did a surface level verification to a virology professor, and I found a few details wrong, and some which I couldn't figure out which fact was likely correct. It took me forever to do, and that was just one part of a very long lecture series. How about the fact that whenever someone offer me a cure for covid-19 in term of injecting bleach, I basically dismissed it out of hand. Was it because I think long and hard about injecting bleach into my body is a good idea? No. There was certainly no critical thinking happening. It's a reflexive rejection. instead of being the police of literally all the information on your giant social media platform? These platforms are not in any way unbiased free for all discussion forums. They are already making editorial choices by choosing to promote viral posts to drive up engagement metric and pushing down any less inflammatory posts. At the very least they can do is slow down any angry promoting posts.
- Moodles 6y ago
  I understand (and agree) that the majority of knowledge we have is based on authority. I'm not suggesting everyone should do their own climate change research to believe climate change. I'm just suggesting they don't have to believe all the headlines they read, they can read multiple news sources with different political views, etc. Basically, you want people to decentralize their trust in authority. I think that'll quell fake news more than getting Facebook to try to moderate it all a like giant, impossible game of whack-o-mole. It doesn't have to be that complicated. We (try to) teach school children this in history class. I think it's a lot more complicated, and risky, to overly moderate your tech platform for "misleading" news, particularly related to politics.

kiba 6y ago

Critical thinking? The vast majority of useful information in the world is based on trust and authority, not on critical verification and people examining the evidence directly. Do you have any idea just how much work it is to verify that just the facts cited actually match up? That doesn't include verifying if the facts are accurate in and in itself. I did a surface level verification to a virology professor, and I found a few details wrong, and some which I couldn't figure out which fact was likely correct. It took me forever to do, and that was just one part of a very long lecture series. How about the fact that whenever someone offer me a cure for covid-19 in term of injecting bleach, I basically dismissed it out of hand. Was it because I think long and hard about injecting bleach into my body is a good idea? No. There was certainly no critical thinking happening. It's a reflexive rejection. instead of being the police of literally all the information on your giant social media platform? These platforms are not in any way unbiased free for all discussion forums. They are already making editorial choices by choosing to promote viral posts to drive up engagement metric and pushing down any less inflammatory posts. At the very least they can do is slow down any angry promoting posts.

Moodles 6y ago
I understand (and agree) that the majority of knowledge we have is based on authority. I'm not suggesting everyone should do their own climate change research to believe climate change. I'm just suggesting they don't have to believe all the headlines they read, they can read multiple news sources with different political views, etc. Basically, you want people to decentralize their trust in authority. I think that'll quell fake news more than getting Facebook to try to moderate it all a like giant, impossible game of whack-o-mole. It doesn't have to be that complicated. We (try to) teach school children this in history class. I think it's a lot more complicated, and risky, to overly moderate your tech platform for "misleading" news, particularly related to politics.