> They just said wrong data makes them (and others) more likely to make mistakes in the future. First of all, there is no wrong data here. Twitter user X said

> They just said wrong data makes them (and others) more likely to make mistakes in the future. First of all, there is no wrong data here. Twitter user X said their iphone did a funny thing. Twitter user X attached a snippet of the image and said they think the iphone can overlay leafs in certain circumstances over faces. That is it. If your conclusion from that is that "iphones has AI magic which overlays leafs on faces for sure" that is your hasty conclusion and it is on you. The data is not wrong, your conclusion is wrong. > None of this weird strawman. :( sombremesa drawn a hasty conclusion. When they realised that it is unsupported they said (direct quote) "I need to be more careful about what I click on (and let into my head..." Which basically says: I should be less curious because look here, I ended up believing the wrong thing. The problem is not being curious, but drawing hasty conclusions and believing the wrong thing. They should stay curious, let a lot of information in their head, but engage in critical thinking. Read the weird twitter thread purporting to show the weird bug and think: What if the twitter user is mistaken? Is it possible that the picture doesn't show what they think it shows? What other possible explanations there are? And so on and so on. That strategy is much more widely applicable, more robust against even intentional deceptions and leads to ultimately better understanding of the world.