3 ms·

> I don't think you'll find many takers here for the idea that the physical and internet surveillance of the UK and Australia are a model to which to look forw

by abraae 5y ago

> I don't think you'll find many takers here for the idea that the physical and internet surveillance of the UK and Australia are a model to which to look forward. Given the binary choice I would rather have the surveillance instead of the outrage-driven anti-science hordes that have been empowered by those US gifts to society Facebook and Twitter.

stevenicr 5y ago
Not a fan of binary choices myself, I'd like to consider these options: 1 - everyone believes every single thing they see on fbk feed. 2 - everyone is well versed in how to highlight, one-click / tap search ggle,ddg, bing - for more info about highlighted thing (taught how to determine what a good source is). See, the first way can work mostly, but many problems emerge in short while. The second way empowers people to think before acting and to learn more and not buy what X is selling automatically. (I have witnessed first hand the damage done by 'fact checking' on fbook - people 100 believe a false post because fbk has not labled it as misinfo - for three days)
- mikepurvis 5y ago
  At this point, there is a sizable population who has internalized the message that "MSM == lies", like, it has to come from some guy's garage YouTube channel for it to be credible. So yes, there's an issue with people not knowing what a "good source" is, but it's hard to know how much education could inoculated this population to a message like that. Especially when in many cases it was a treadmill of Fox News telling people that CNN is lies, and then OAN and Newsmax telling them that Fox is lies, and then internet sources telling them that anything on TV is lies. The thrill was never the truth; the thrill was in thinking you were getting some kind of unique insider scoop.
anthk 5y ago
>have been empowered by those US gifts to society Facebook and Twitter. Hope you are kidding to us... FB and Twtr are huge turds full of anti-science mobs composed anti-vaxxers sharing fake news everywhere. There is more science in all the IRC and Usenet subnets today than in the whole FB network...

by abraae 5y ago

stevenicr 5y ago

Not a fan of binary choices myself, I'd like to consider these options: 1 - everyone believes every single thing they see on fbk feed. 2 - everyone is well versed in how to highlight, one-click / tap search ggle,ddg, bing - for more info about highlighted thing (taught how to determine what a good source is). See, the first way can work mostly, but many problems emerge in short while. The second way empowers people to think before acting and to learn more and not buy what X is selling automatically. (I have witnessed first hand the damage done by 'fact checking' on fbook - people 100 believe a false post because fbk has not labled it as misinfo - for three days)

mikepurvis 5y ago
At this point, there is a sizable population who has internalized the message that "MSM == lies", like, it has to come from some guy's garage YouTube channel for it to be credible. So yes, there's an issue with people not knowing what a "good source" is, but it's hard to know how much education could inoculated this population to a message like that. Especially when in many cases it was a treadmill of Fox News telling people that CNN is lies, and then OAN and Newsmax telling them that Fox is lies, and then internet sources telling them that anything on TV is lies. The thrill was never the truth; the thrill was in thinking you were getting some kind of unique insider scoop.

anthk 5y ago

>have been empowered by those US gifts to society Facebook and Twitter. Hope you are kidding to us... FB and Twtr are huge turds full of anti-science mobs composed anti-vaxxers sharing fake news everywhere. There is more science in all the IRC and Usenet subnets today than in the whole FB network...