11 ms·

That's how free speech works in the modern world. You have to waste your time, energy, nerves to refute a total nonsense that zombie-like mob find useful in sup

That's how free speech works in the modern world. You have to waste your time, energy, nerves to refute a total nonsense that zombie-like mob find useful in supporting. An egocentric profit heavily overweights truth and sense.

agumonkey 6y ago
> An egocentric profit heavily overweights truth and sense. nice saying
- Xunjin 6y ago
  Indeed. IMHO, this phrase really got the essence about the pandemic and disinformation. I could go further, it captures the essence of "lying for profit" no matter the economic/political system.
  - agumonkey 6y ago
    I wouldn't say lying for profit but that profit somehow defines truth.
LAMike 6y ago
I know it's exhausting! HN readers have been a zombie-like mob when it comes to ignoring Bitcoin, it's sad to see a otherwise smart group of people miss out on the biggest thing since the Internet.
ForHackernews 6y ago
There's a name for this phenomenon: "The Unbearable Asymmetry of Bullshit"[0] It's orders of magnitude easier to put forth some total horseshit ideas than it is to refute them. [0] https://quillette.com/2016/02/15/the-unbearable-asymmetry-of-bullshit/ https://quillette.com/2016/02/15/the-unbearable-asymmetry-of...
- Kyro38 6y ago
  Also known as Brandolini's Law. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini%27s_law
mancerayder 6y ago
How was free speech in the .. non-modern world any different?
- bluescrn 6y ago
  In the past it took real effort to broadcast your ideas to the world. People had to really believe in an idea to help it spread. These days a throwaway tweet or blog post can be seen by millions before there’s been any chance to debate the argument on a smaller scale (and either refine or abandon it)
  - mancerayder 6y ago
    Isn't it a good thing, that anyone can be seen by millions? You want to go back to the days where you had to own a newspaper or a radio station to be heard?
  - mynameisvlad 6y ago
    When was the last time a tweet or any other online interaction of yours suddenly had millions of viewers? You're making it seem like this happens all the time. In reality, while it is easier to broadcast your message to people all around the world in modern times, people still need to "really believe in an idea to help it spread". Unless you're already famous, just because you put it on a platform with potential millions of viewers doesn't mean that you'll actually get millions of viewers without trying really hard.
    - notsuoh 6y ago
      When the last time _my_ tweet reached millions of users is not the right question. We see that daily tweets go viral and are seen by millions, some things are seen by a billion people (though perhaps not virally in a short period of time). If people are pumping bitcoin with rampant speculation to get other people on the train to increase its value, just a handful need to go viral to increase value, not necessarily yours or mine specifically. It's like the Birthday Paradox. The chances that someone in a room shares my birthday are small, but the chances that two people in the room share a birthday is large. It just takes a few of the millions of tweets to go viral. I won't address your second point at length except to say that it's naive to think that with the ease of broadcasting, suddenly the wall is at rebroadcasting, which can be done with no more than a click and is significantly easier than creating the original message.
Vaslo 6y ago
So then we should ban articles like this?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
slibhb 6y ago
If there's no free speech, there's no reason to ever rationally justify anything because nothing can be disputed. If you take "correct opinion, rationally justified" as your definition of truth, then you cannot have truth without free speech. That's not the same as saying "free speech leads to truth". It's saying "truth cannot exist without free speech". The fact that some people are "bored of disputation" is not a good sign.
- simias 6y ago
  There's no simple solution to this problem but note that the problem is not so much that we're "bored of disputation" is that we're "overwhelmed with disputation". It's always the same issues: making a bold, unsubstantiated, potentially inflammatory claim like "Vitamin E is the future of medicine and you should all take supplements, don't listen to what big pharma says!" takes only 10 seconds. Debunking the claim however would require some time and effort, mainly because proving a negative is always more time consuming that making a wild claim.
throw0101a 6y ago
> You have to waste your time, energy, nerves to refute a total nonsense that zombie-like mob find useful in supporting. See also: > Sealioning (also spelled sea-lioning and sea lioning) is a type of trolling or harassment that consists of pursuing people with persistent requests for evidence or repeated questions, while maintaining a pretense of civility and sincerity.[1][2][3][4] It may take the form of "incessant, bad-faith invitations to engage in debate".[5] The term originated with a 2014 strip of the webcomic Wondermark by David Malki.[6] * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning
dalbasal 6y ago
IDK... Whatever the quality of the original, this rebuttal is incredibly written and "Why Bitcoin is not a Battery" turns out to be an interesting topic. A lot of economics and social theories generally use a lot of metaphor. A lot of mistakes get made by habitually applying an incorrect metaphor as a model. Battery is a sensible metaphor for aluminium. It is not a good metaphor for bitcoin. I'm pretty sure the original author made that error honestly. Either way, I learned a lot about bitcoin's energy economics.
Audoenus 6y ago
I'm just trying to understand your position better: Would you say that false information harms you personally?

agumonkey 6y ago

> An egocentric profit heavily overweights truth and sense. nice saying

Xunjin 6y ago
Indeed. IMHO, this phrase really got the essence about the pandemic and disinformation. I could go further, it captures the essence of "lying for profit" no matter the economic/political system.
- agumonkey 6y ago
  I wouldn't say lying for profit but that profit somehow defines truth.

LAMike 6y ago

I know it's exhausting! HN readers have been a zombie-like mob when it comes to ignoring Bitcoin, it's sad to see a otherwise smart group of people miss out on the biggest thing since the Internet.

ForHackernews 6y ago

There's a name for this phenomenon: "The Unbearable Asymmetry of Bullshit"[0] It's orders of magnitude easier to put forth some total horseshit ideas than it is to refute them. [0] https://quillette.com/2016/02/15/the-unbearable-asymmetry-of-bullshit/ https://quillette.com/2016/02/15/the-unbearable-asymmetry-of...

Kyro38 6y ago
Also known as Brandolini's Law. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini%27s_law

mancerayder 6y ago

How was free speech in the .. non-modern world any different?

bluescrn 6y ago
In the past it took real effort to broadcast your ideas to the world. People had to really believe in an idea to help it spread. These days a throwaway tweet or blog post can be seen by millions before there’s been any chance to debate the argument on a smaller scale (and either refine or abandon it)
- mancerayder 6y ago
  Isn't it a good thing, that anyone can be seen by millions? You want to go back to the days where you had to own a newspaper or a radio station to be heard?
- mynameisvlad 6y ago
  When was the last time a tweet or any other online interaction of yours suddenly had millions of viewers? You're making it seem like this happens all the time. In reality, while it is easier to broadcast your message to people all around the world in modern times, people still need to "really believe in an idea to help it spread". Unless you're already famous, just because you put it on a platform with potential millions of viewers doesn't mean that you'll actually get millions of viewers without trying really hard.
  - notsuoh 6y ago
    When the last time _my_ tweet reached millions of users is not the right question. We see that daily tweets go viral and are seen by millions, some things are seen by a billion people (though perhaps not virally in a short period of time). If people are pumping bitcoin with rampant speculation to get other people on the train to increase its value, just a handful need to go viral to increase value, not necessarily yours or mine specifically. It's like the Birthday Paradox. The chances that someone in a room shares my birthday are small, but the chances that two people in the room share a birthday is large. It just takes a few of the millions of tweets to go viral. I won't address your second point at length except to say that it's naive to think that with the ease of broadcasting, suddenly the wall is at rebroadcasting, which can be done with no more than a click and is significantly easier than creating the original message.

Vaslo 6y ago

So then we should ban articles like this?

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

slibhb 6y ago

If there's no free speech, there's no reason to ever rationally justify anything because nothing can be disputed. If you take "correct opinion, rationally justified" as your definition of truth, then you cannot have truth without free speech. That's not the same as saying "free speech leads to truth". It's saying "truth cannot exist without free speech". The fact that some people are "bored of disputation" is not a good sign.

simias 6y ago
There's no simple solution to this problem but note that the problem is not so much that we're "bored of disputation" is that we're "overwhelmed with disputation". It's always the same issues: making a bold, unsubstantiated, potentially inflammatory claim like "Vitamin E is the future of medicine and you should all take supplements, don't listen to what big pharma says!" takes only 10 seconds. Debunking the claim however would require some time and effort, mainly because proving a negative is always more time consuming that making a wild claim.

throw0101a 6y ago

> You have to waste your time, energy, nerves to refute a total nonsense that zombie-like mob find useful in supporting. See also: > Sealioning (also spelled sea-lioning and sea lioning) is a type of trolling or harassment that consists of pursuing people with persistent requests for evidence or repeated questions, while maintaining a pretense of civility and sincerity.[1][2][3][4] It may take the form of "incessant, bad-faith invitations to engage in debate".[5] The term originated with a 2014 strip of the webcomic Wondermark by David Malki.[6] * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning

dalbasal 6y ago

IDK... Whatever the quality of the original, this rebuttal is incredibly written and "Why Bitcoin is not a Battery" turns out to be an interesting topic. A lot of economics and social theories generally use a lot of metaphor. A lot of mistakes get made by habitually applying an incorrect metaphor as a model. Battery is a sensible metaphor for aluminium. It is not a good metaphor for bitcoin. I'm pretty sure the original author made that error honestly. Either way, I learned a lot about bitcoin's energy economics.

Audoenus 6y ago

I'm just trying to understand your position better: Would you say that false information harms you personally?