9 ms·

"Misinformation" should not be combatted by anything other than better, more persuasive information.

ookblah 5y ago
Great in theory, but if you've ever debated someone who is not acting in good faith online it's near impossible. Their energy input is an order of magnitude lower than yours. And yes, in this specific context it IS misinformation, disinformation, or just flat out false.
- vibrato2 5y ago
  I haven't seen any serious attempt to address the concerns with the "vaccines". Only ostracism and censorship. Plus a healthy dose of disinformation about the safety and efficacy profiles of these therapies. If the science is so clear, why not give an anti vaxxer a huge prime time platform and embarrass them in debate?
  - JaimeThompson 5y ago
    Which concerns do you have?
    - vibrato2 5y ago
      With these specific therapies: 1) Myocarditis (long term heart damage) 2) general inflammation and clot risk 3) long term risks of brand new mRNA technology For myself and other young athletes, my research leads me to understand that the vaccine is higher risk than the infection. My greatest concern is the totalitarianism behind vaccine passports. At this point even if the shot cured cancer I wouldn't take it because of how it's pushed.
      - paulryanrogers 5y ago
        > For myself and other young athletes, my research leads me to understand that the vaccine is higher risk than the infection. As someone with a pre-existing heart condition I'd like to read that research. Do you have any links?
      - rwcarlsen 5y ago
        You are not alone. The authoritarian threat and government overreach problems are IMO orders of magnitude more important and concerning than the virus. I will almost certainly be taking a stand and be terminated by my employer over this within the next few weeks.
      - suzzer99 5y ago
        Here's a good study about the risk of myocarditis (it's very low). https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2110475 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2110475 There's a lot of misleading information out there about myocarditis that makes the risk sound much worse than it is. Yes adverse myocarditis reaction is a risk. But it's something like 1 in 17,000. 1 in 500 Americans have died from covid. Even if you're young and healthy, we have no idea the long term risks of contracting a serious case of covid. You have to factor that into the risk equation.
        spectramax 5y ago
        > But it's something like 1 in 17,000. 1 in 500 Americans have died from covid. This is true but misleading. You need to account for age as the primary factor that determines the risk exposure. Edit: Surprised that someone downvoted this. Care you explain what you disagree here? I am simply pointing out that it is not straight forward to compare risk levels because they are highly dependent on age.
        mcguire 5y ago
        Here's a simple chart of relative risk by age group: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/investigations-discovery/hospitalization-death-by-age.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/investi... There are roughly 53,300,000 people aged 18-29 and ~3400 deaths (https://www.statista.com/statistics/1191568/reported-deaths-from-covid-by-age-us/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1191568/reported-deaths-...), which works out to 1 in 16,000. Of course, you say, that's assuming all 18-29 year-olds have had COVID, which is wrong. There's only been 7,400,000 cases among that age group (https://www.statista.com/statistics/1254271/us-total-number-of-covid-cases-by-age-group/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1254271/us-total-number-...), giving a 1 in 2200 risk.
        JuliusPullo 5y ago
        Then again, those 1/500 are old age or with existing debilitating health conditions. The rest of the people have a close to zero chance of dying from Covid. It is not a great idea to expose them to that 1/17000 chance of getting an unnecessary heart condition that will affect them for life. And remember, myocarditis and blood clot issues are secondary effects we know about now. The vaccine was invented and released very recently and there is no way to know the long term effects. And don't forget, this vaccine works with a brand-new genetic technology never before released to the public.
      - goldenbikeshed 5y ago
        Regarding 2): https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34237049/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34237049/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34473684/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34473684/
      - praxulus 5y ago
        The risk of Myocarditis from COVID-19 itself seems to be greater than the risk of getting it from a vaccine. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7035e5.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7035e5.htm >At this point even if the shot cured cancer I wouldn't take it because of how it's pushed. I don't think I'll ever be able to understand vaccine skeptics.
        xallarap 5y ago
        Cure covid and vaccine against cancer. Makes more Sense.
        chefkoch 5y ago
        I don't think he knows how it is to have cancer.
        vibrato2 5y ago
        I know I'd prefer it to living under tyranny. Liberty or Death.
        praxulus 5y ago
        Refusing to do something purely because somebody is trying to make you do it still means you're letting other people control your actions. That's not liberty either.
      - mcguire 5y ago
        "...totalitarianism behind vaccine passports..." Problem: An ongoing pandemic, requiring greater or lesser levels of isolation. Solution: A vaccine. Vaccinated individuals are much less likely to suffer the ill effects of the disease and to transmit the disease. Isolation is no longer necessary. Problem: Large portions of the population refuse to take the vaccine. Isolation is still required for this portion. Solution: Allow those who have been vaccinated freedom from isolation. Problem: TOTALITARIANISM!
        effie 5y ago
        You assume the policy of pushing vaccination is sound, so the methods of its implementation are not totalitarian or it isn't a concern. But even if it was a sound policy from the standpoint of the state, the methods employed (censorship of communications on COVID and vaccines, restricting freedoms of unvaccinated) is still a totalitarian method.
        mcguire 5y ago
        "restricting freedoms of unvaccinated" No shirt, no shoes, no service. TOTALITARIANISM!!!
        vibrato2 5y ago
        Clothing is not permanent. Injections are.
        mike741 5y ago
        taking drugs is not the same as wearing clothes
      - _moof 5y ago
        > At this point even if the shot cured cancer I wouldn't take it because of how it's pushed. And there it is. For you at least, this has nothing to do with evidence, or facts, or information, or patience or empathy or reasoning or sound medical judgment or anything else, it's just plain stubbornness that's so out of control you're willing to die rather than do something someone else told you to do. Look, I get it. I hate being told what to do. But at least be honest with yourself that that's what's going on, and that all your talk of side effects and whatnot is a smokescreen.
  - ookblah 5y ago
    Why not give a flat earther a huge prime time platform? I mean that in of itself proves nothing. There have been many attempts and even in my own circles and in the end the it has nothing to do with the facts and all about fear and badly calculating risk. I can understand the mentality if you're hesitant of the vaccines being new and want to wait, but just understand that the current data shows you're taking a higher risk by not taking it. Your choice in the end, though. People who are full anti-vax are a different thing altogether.
    - musingsole 5y ago
      > Why not give a flat earther a huge prime time platform? They did. It happened, and the dude died in the rocket as it crashed to Earth. And following that, I stopped hearing so many murmurs about if a lake surface was flat or convex.
      - bena 5y ago
        He died last year. He also had successful launches previously. And those didn't halt anything. The world, collectively, has been a bit busy with other stuff since last year. If anything COVID conspiracy stuff has pushed out all other conspiracies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Hughes_(daredevil) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Hughes_(daredevil)
        musingsole 5y ago
        > If anything COVID conspiracy stuff has pushed out all other conspiracies. Conjecture is as conjecture does
        bena 5y ago
        As opposed to generalizing from self doing as it does? You didn't see it so it must not exist?
  - unethical_ban 5y ago
    Dozens of books have been written documenting the absolute, unmitigated travesty of the Trump administration. 70 million people still voted for him, and a majority of those did so as a positive review of his performance! I'm not sure what to do, but I know now that "mountains of evidence" does not stop alluring stupidity.
    - Nemrod67 5y ago
      https://youtu.be/lw2BVI9OhC4 https://youtu.be/lw2BVI9OhC4
      - unethical_ban 5y ago
        Useless.
  - depaya 5y ago
    It's not possible to embarrass someone with no shame. It's easy to lie and debate dishonestly[1]. Engaging in such a debate would only legitimize a position that may have no legitimacy to begin with. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  - criddell 5y ago
    > If the science is so clear, why not give an anti vaxxer a huge prime time platform and embarrass them in debate? That doesn't work. It didn't work for climate change and it won't work for vaccines.
  - krageon 5y ago
    > If the science is so clear, why not give an anti vaxxer a huge prime time platform and embarrass them in debate? Neonazis clamor that they need a platform all the time. Now that we can see what that's like (the US, in case it is not clear) we can see that this is a terrible idea.
  - mcguire 5y ago
    Pro tip: if you declare any and all "serious attempts to address the concerns" as "disinformation", then the only thing left is ostracism and censorship. BTW, ever heard of Duane Gish?
    - vibrato2 5y ago
      Pro tip: If you make a strawman argument, the only thing illustrated is masturbation. And No. never heard of him.
- inglor_cz 5y ago
  I have and I still think so. First of all, it is not realistic to assume that you will convince everyone; you won't. Second, practice is necessary and bad faith counterparts will help you get better. It is not my impression that "energy input of people spreading X is an order of magnitude lower". On the other hand, they obsess over such topics and spend a lot of time spreading their views - that is why they are visible.
seqastian 5y ago
Too bad that is not how humans work. If the good information is complicated and scary, we will go for easy and pleasing every time.
ramses0 5y ago
You’re wrong, several Oxford and Harvard studies show that misinformation is best fought with more misinformation. Either that, or your own personal beliefs, which are _way_ more true than something studied for years by ivory tower academics who are always changing their mind. Like and subscribe to my podcast and buy my T-Shirts……
jhedwards 5y ago
Good luck explaining to the mob that "there in fact is no fire", as they charge out of the theater. I typically agree with you, and it was justice Louis Brandeis who said it so well: “If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence.” On the other hand, the one exception to this is when the speech is question causes a clear and present danger. We are facing a rather perverse crisis in the world right now with respect to vaccine misinformation. I'm not saying I know the answer, but I know we did not get here through a lack of quality, persuasive information.
- peteradio 5y ago
  I think people are talking completely passed each other. The conservative crowd will debate the severity of the existing pandemic and whether the cure is worse than the illness. The vaccinate all crowd well just wants everyone to be vaccinated, the severity of the crisis is a forgone conclusion. I think both points of view have strong merit but its hard to mend the two views together they just don't really mix. The whole thing ends up being labelled "misinformation" because we aren't even on the same page. I find myself in the conservative camp which is a rare occurrence for me. But I can't for the life of me understand how people can be so enchanted with the heads of our federal organizations when the data behind their words does not stack up. Misleading the importance of data, stretching and inverting the burden of proof we should expect from our government ultimately makes me see them as liars. Watching liars speak is one thing but to see a whole populace see positive meaning, smiling nodding and go on to shout down anyone who tests the rhetoric, its blind fanaticism.
  - jhedwards 5y ago
    I think the crux of the issue is that "the cure is worse than the illness" is objectively false, as the vaccine has been proven to be safe, and bodies from COVID deaths continue to pile up. I try not to listen to politicians for the reasons you mentioned, but just looking at the data it seems like an awfully simple problem to me.
kgwxd 5y ago
If the hare never takes a nap, the tortoise will never catch up.
- account42 5y ago
  If the hare never takes a nap it will die of sleep deprivation.
atty 5y ago
This is an outmoded concept based on the idea that humans are purely rational creatures, which we already know is false. Just providing better information does not sway individuals. People are far more swayed by information from their “tribe”, even if that information is patently false, than they are by quantitatively better information, because it makes them feel good. That’s why actions like this seem to be necessary.
x86_64Ubuntu 5y ago
Why do we always assume that it's "misinformation" and that if people were told or shown better, they would want better. Many times, people actually want the bad thing. I can't help but see the "Free Speech" alarmism on HN originating from the fact that the market of ideas is no longer participating in arguments about right-wing viewpoints, but is actively moving against them and taking them off the shelf.
mtberatwork 5y ago
Related: "Why Science Can't Settle Political Disputes" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28693269 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28693269
krageon 5y ago
Better information is not more persuasive.
- the_optimist 5y ago
  If this is correct, then why would you believe you've ascertained truth? The very hallmark of truth as we know it is that 'better' information, meaning more and more clarified data consistently resolve on the same conclusion.
  - bashinator 5y ago
    You’re conflating “correct” and “persuasive”.
    - the_optimist 5y ago
      You're assuming reasoning that defies communication.
      - lovich 5y ago
        The reasoning behind understand that “correct” and “persuasive” are two adjectives that aren’t synonyms and describe different values is fairly simple to communicate
      - krageon 5y ago
        No, nobody is doing that. Because we weren't talking about that at all.
enraged_camel 5y ago
Nah. Brandolini's Law, also known as the bullshit asymmetry principle, explains why this will not work: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini%27s_law The gist of it is that making up bullshit takes almost no energy, whereas refuting that bullshit effectively will be very time-consuming. This is exacerbated by the fact that bullshit is usually packaged in a way that makes it spread way faster by, for example, exploiting social media "engagement" algorithms. There are corollaries to this. For example, the idiom "a lie can travel halfway around the world before the truth is done tying its shoes."
- sleepybrett 5y ago
  Bullshit is a ddos attack, youtube is just putting up a packet filter that drops a portion of the ddos packets before they make it to the target.
yupper32 5y ago
Combating misinformation with more persuasive information takes about 10-100x more effort than putting out the original misinformation.
_moof 5y ago
People are not little machines that accept information as input, apply impartial rules of logic, and then spit out a correct answer. People are social-emotional animals with a carefully guarded sense of self, a basic need to belong, and all kinds of nervous system structures that, when activated, prevent rational thought. This is not as simple as putting more information out there.

Great in theory, but if you've ever debated someone who is not acting in good faith online it's near impossible. Their energy input is an order of magnitude lower than yours. And yes, in this specific context it IS misinformation, disinformation, or just flat out false.

vibrato2 5y ago
I haven't seen any serious attempt to address the concerns with the "vaccines". Only ostracism and censorship. Plus a healthy dose of disinformation about the safety and efficacy profiles of these therapies. If the science is so clear, why not give an anti vaxxer a huge prime time platform and embarrass them in debate?
- JaimeThompson 5y ago
  Which concerns do you have?
  - vibrato2 5y ago
    With these specific therapies: 1) Myocarditis (long term heart damage) 2) general inflammation and clot risk 3) long term risks of brand new mRNA technology For myself and other young athletes, my research leads me to understand that the vaccine is higher risk than the infection. My greatest concern is the totalitarianism behind vaccine passports. At this point even if the shot cured cancer I wouldn't take it because of how it's pushed.
    - paulryanrogers 5y ago
      > For myself and other young athletes, my research leads me to understand that the vaccine is higher risk than the infection. As someone with a pre-existing heart condition I'd like to read that research. Do you have any links?
    - rwcarlsen 5y ago
      You are not alone. The authoritarian threat and government overreach problems are IMO orders of magnitude more important and concerning than the virus. I will almost certainly be taking a stand and be terminated by my employer over this within the next few weeks.
    - suzzer99 5y ago
      Here's a good study about the risk of myocarditis (it's very low). https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2110475 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2110475 There's a lot of misleading information out there about myocarditis that makes the risk sound much worse than it is. Yes adverse myocarditis reaction is a risk. But it's something like 1 in 17,000. 1 in 500 Americans have died from covid. Even if you're young and healthy, we have no idea the long term risks of contracting a serious case of covid. You have to factor that into the risk equation.
      - spectramax 5y ago
        > But it's something like 1 in 17,000. 1 in 500 Americans have died from covid. This is true but misleading. You need to account for age as the primary factor that determines the risk exposure. Edit: Surprised that someone downvoted this. Care you explain what you disagree here? I am simply pointing out that it is not straight forward to compare risk levels because they are highly dependent on age.
        mcguire 5y ago
        Here's a simple chart of relative risk by age group: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/investigations-discovery/hospitalization-death-by-age.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/investi... There are roughly 53,300,000 people aged 18-29 and ~3400 deaths (https://www.statista.com/statistics/1191568/reported-deaths-from-covid-by-age-us/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1191568/reported-deaths-...), which works out to 1 in 16,000. Of course, you say, that's assuming all 18-29 year-olds have had COVID, which is wrong. There's only been 7,400,000 cases among that age group (https://www.statista.com/statistics/1254271/us-total-number-of-covid-cases-by-age-group/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1254271/us-total-number-...), giving a 1 in 2200 risk.
      - JuliusPullo 5y ago
        Then again, those 1/500 are old age or with existing debilitating health conditions. The rest of the people have a close to zero chance of dying from Covid. It is not a great idea to expose them to that 1/17000 chance of getting an unnecessary heart condition that will affect them for life. And remember, myocarditis and blood clot issues are secondary effects we know about now. The vaccine was invented and released very recently and there is no way to know the long term effects. And don't forget, this vaccine works with a brand-new genetic technology never before released to the public.
    - goldenbikeshed 5y ago
      Regarding 2): https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34237049/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34237049/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34473684/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34473684/
    - praxulus 5y ago
      The risk of Myocarditis from COVID-19 itself seems to be greater than the risk of getting it from a vaccine. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7035e5.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7035e5.htm >At this point even if the shot cured cancer I wouldn't take it because of how it's pushed. I don't think I'll ever be able to understand vaccine skeptics.
      - xallarap 5y ago
        Cure covid and vaccine against cancer. Makes more Sense.
      - chefkoch 5y ago
        I don't think he knows how it is to have cancer.
        vibrato2 5y ago
        I know I'd prefer it to living under tyranny. Liberty or Death.
        praxulus 5y ago
        Refusing to do something purely because somebody is trying to make you do it still means you're letting other people control your actions. That's not liberty either.
    - mcguire 5y ago
      "...totalitarianism behind vaccine passports..." Problem: An ongoing pandemic, requiring greater or lesser levels of isolation. Solution: A vaccine. Vaccinated individuals are much less likely to suffer the ill effects of the disease and to transmit the disease. Isolation is no longer necessary. Problem: Large portions of the population refuse to take the vaccine. Isolation is still required for this portion. Solution: Allow those who have been vaccinated freedom from isolation. Problem: TOTALITARIANISM!
      - effie 5y ago
        You assume the policy of pushing vaccination is sound, so the methods of its implementation are not totalitarian or it isn't a concern. But even if it was a sound policy from the standpoint of the state, the methods employed (censorship of communications on COVID and vaccines, restricting freedoms of unvaccinated) is still a totalitarian method.
        mcguire 5y ago
        "restricting freedoms of unvaccinated" No shirt, no shoes, no service. TOTALITARIANISM!!!
        vibrato2 5y ago
        Clothing is not permanent. Injections are.
        mike741 5y ago
        taking drugs is not the same as wearing clothes
    - _moof 5y ago
      > At this point even if the shot cured cancer I wouldn't take it because of how it's pushed. And there it is. For you at least, this has nothing to do with evidence, or facts, or information, or patience or empathy or reasoning or sound medical judgment or anything else, it's just plain stubbornness that's so out of control you're willing to die rather than do something someone else told you to do. Look, I get it. I hate being told what to do. But at least be honest with yourself that that's what's going on, and that all your talk of side effects and whatnot is a smokescreen.
- ookblah 5y ago
  Why not give a flat earther a huge prime time platform? I mean that in of itself proves nothing. There have been many attempts and even in my own circles and in the end the it has nothing to do with the facts and all about fear and badly calculating risk. I can understand the mentality if you're hesitant of the vaccines being new and want to wait, but just understand that the current data shows you're taking a higher risk by not taking it. Your choice in the end, though. People who are full anti-vax are a different thing altogether.
  - musingsole 5y ago
    > Why not give a flat earther a huge prime time platform? They did. It happened, and the dude died in the rocket as it crashed to Earth. And following that, I stopped hearing so many murmurs about if a lake surface was flat or convex.
    - bena 5y ago
      He died last year. He also had successful launches previously. And those didn't halt anything. The world, collectively, has been a bit busy with other stuff since last year. If anything COVID conspiracy stuff has pushed out all other conspiracies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Hughes_(daredevil) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Hughes_(daredevil)
      - musingsole 5y ago
        > If anything COVID conspiracy stuff has pushed out all other conspiracies. Conjecture is as conjecture does
        bena 5y ago
        As opposed to generalizing from self doing as it does? You didn't see it so it must not exist?
- unethical_ban 5y ago
  Dozens of books have been written documenting the absolute, unmitigated travesty of the Trump administration. 70 million people still voted for him, and a majority of those did so as a positive review of his performance! I'm not sure what to do, but I know now that "mountains of evidence" does not stop alluring stupidity.
  - Nemrod67 5y ago
    https://youtu.be/lw2BVI9OhC4 https://youtu.be/lw2BVI9OhC4
    - unethical_ban 5y ago
      Useless.
- depaya 5y ago
  It's not possible to embarrass someone with no shame. It's easy to lie and debate dishonestly[1]. Engaging in such a debate would only legitimize a position that may have no legitimacy to begin with. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- criddell 5y ago
  > If the science is so clear, why not give an anti vaxxer a huge prime time platform and embarrass them in debate? That doesn't work. It didn't work for climate change and it won't work for vaccines.
- krageon 5y ago
  > If the science is so clear, why not give an anti vaxxer a huge prime time platform and embarrass them in debate? Neonazis clamor that they need a platform all the time. Now that we can see what that's like (the US, in case it is not clear) we can see that this is a terrible idea.
- mcguire 5y ago
  Pro tip: if you declare any and all "serious attempts to address the concerns" as "disinformation", then the only thing left is ostracism and censorship. BTW, ever heard of Duane Gish?
  - vibrato2 5y ago
    Pro tip: If you make a strawman argument, the only thing illustrated is masturbation. And No. never heard of him.
inglor_cz 5y ago
I have and I still think so. First of all, it is not realistic to assume that you will convince everyone; you won't. Second, practice is necessary and bad faith counterparts will help you get better. It is not my impression that "energy input of people spreading X is an order of magnitude lower". On the other hand, they obsess over such topics and spend a lot of time spreading their views - that is why they are visible.

seqastian 5y ago

Too bad that is not how humans work. If the good information is complicated and scary, we will go for easy and pleasing every time.

ramses0 5y ago

You’re wrong, several Oxford and Harvard studies show that misinformation is best fought with more misinformation. Either that, or your own personal beliefs, which are _way_ more true than something studied for years by ivory tower academics who are always changing their mind. Like and subscribe to my podcast and buy my T-Shirts……

jhedwards 5y ago

Good luck explaining to the mob that "there in fact is no fire", as they charge out of the theater. I typically agree with you, and it was justice Louis Brandeis who said it so well: “If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence.” On the other hand, the one exception to this is when the speech is question causes a clear and present danger. We are facing a rather perverse crisis in the world right now with respect to vaccine misinformation. I'm not saying I know the answer, but I know we did not get here through a lack of quality, persuasive information.

peteradio 5y ago
I think people are talking completely passed each other. The conservative crowd will debate the severity of the existing pandemic and whether the cure is worse than the illness. The vaccinate all crowd well just wants everyone to be vaccinated, the severity of the crisis is a forgone conclusion. I think both points of view have strong merit but its hard to mend the two views together they just don't really mix. The whole thing ends up being labelled "misinformation" because we aren't even on the same page. I find myself in the conservative camp which is a rare occurrence for me. But I can't for the life of me understand how people can be so enchanted with the heads of our federal organizations when the data behind their words does not stack up. Misleading the importance of data, stretching and inverting the burden of proof we should expect from our government ultimately makes me see them as liars. Watching liars speak is one thing but to see a whole populace see positive meaning, smiling nodding and go on to shout down anyone who tests the rhetoric, its blind fanaticism.
- jhedwards 5y ago
  I think the crux of the issue is that "the cure is worse than the illness" is objectively false, as the vaccine has been proven to be safe, and bodies from COVID deaths continue to pile up. I try not to listen to politicians for the reasons you mentioned, but just looking at the data it seems like an awfully simple problem to me.

kgwxd 5y ago

If the hare never takes a nap, the tortoise will never catch up.

account42 5y ago
If the hare never takes a nap it will die of sleep deprivation.

atty 5y ago

This is an outmoded concept based on the idea that humans are purely rational creatures, which we already know is false. Just providing better information does not sway individuals. People are far more swayed by information from their “tribe”, even if that information is patently false, than they are by quantitatively better information, because it makes them feel good. That’s why actions like this seem to be necessary.

x86_64Ubuntu 5y ago

Why do we always assume that it's "misinformation" and that if people were told or shown better, they would want better. Many times, people actually want the bad thing. I can't help but see the "Free Speech" alarmism on HN originating from the fact that the market of ideas is no longer participating in arguments about right-wing viewpoints, but is actively moving against them and taking them off the shelf.

mtberatwork 5y ago

Related: "Why Science Can't Settle Political Disputes" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28693269 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28693269

krageon 5y ago

Better information is not more persuasive.

the_optimist 5y ago
If this is correct, then why would you believe you've ascertained truth? The very hallmark of truth as we know it is that 'better' information, meaning more and more clarified data consistently resolve on the same conclusion.
- bashinator 5y ago
  You’re conflating “correct” and “persuasive”.
  - the_optimist 5y ago
    You're assuming reasoning that defies communication.
    - lovich 5y ago
      The reasoning behind understand that “correct” and “persuasive” are two adjectives that aren’t synonyms and describe different values is fairly simple to communicate
    - krageon 5y ago
      No, nobody is doing that. Because we weren't talking about that at all.

enraged_camel 5y ago

Nah. Brandolini's Law, also known as the bullshit asymmetry principle, explains why this will not work: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini%27s_law The gist of it is that making up bullshit takes almost no energy, whereas refuting that bullshit effectively will be very time-consuming. This is exacerbated by the fact that bullshit is usually packaged in a way that makes it spread way faster by, for example, exploiting social media "engagement" algorithms. There are corollaries to this. For example, the idiom "a lie can travel halfway around the world before the truth is done tying its shoes."

sleepybrett 5y ago
Bullshit is a ddos attack, youtube is just putting up a packet filter that drops a portion of the ddos packets before they make it to the target.

yupper32 5y ago

Combating misinformation with more persuasive information takes about 10-100x more effort than putting out the original misinformation.

_moof 5y ago

People are not little machines that accept information as input, apply impartial rules of logic, and then spit out a correct answer. People are social-emotional animals with a carefully guarded sense of self, a basic need to belong, and all kinds of nervous system structures that, when activated, prevent rational thought. This is not as simple as putting more information out there.