3 ms·
I bet this objectively can't be helped. Nuance requires representing uncertainty and is higher complexity from accounting for multiple special cases. Placing m
by Vetch 5y ago
I bet this objectively can't be helped.
Nuance requires representing uncertainty and is higher complexity from accounting for multiple special cases. Placing more cognitive load and attentional demands on receiver.
Human communication is lossy and decoding can be non-trivial inference. Given that everyone comes with differing priors, the more finer grained and complex details are required in reconstructing message intent, the more likely it is to be misconstruected. Failing to attend to a single core detail can rend meaning.
At scale the chance for errors to propagate without correction increases.
Getting rid of fine grained details and communicating a lower entropy message inline with a crowd's biases also ensures it's more likely to survive in a form close to original intent. A good manipulative orator focuses less on truth or content and more on minimizing mismatch between receiver mental states and orator's directional preferences.
- jychang 5y agoYou've put into text format, something which most extroverts already intuitively understand. Communicating with more than one person at a time requires dumbed down slogans and short bits of summarized information. Nuanced long form communication is a luxury that can rarely be afforded.
- pg_1234 5y agoMuch of Shakespeare's genius was to pitch his work simultaneously for multiple levels of sophistication ... social commentary, poetry and fart humour, all at the same time.
- mettamage 5y agoYou made quite a nuanced and elaborate point. I guess it scales on text with a specific crowd (HN).
- neilparikh 5y agoIt works here because their point about having differing priors. On HN, people largely have similar priors (at least on some axes).
- bodhibyte 5y agoI'm genuinely appreciating the nuance and complexity in your reply. Thank you!
- narag 5y agoI bet this objectively can't be helped. Actually it can be helped when everybody agrees that some information must be known by everybody. Communication campaigns, making it a subject in schools... So the problem uses to be that there are opposing sides trying to beat each other. OK, that's obvious, isn't it? But come to think of it, is society so divided that most people's interests conflicts with somebody else's? I understand that there are diverse interests dividing countries or continents, but often differences inside the same country seem to be artificially amplified and fuelled.
- gowld 5y ago"Make your idea a required chapter of study for a week in every school" isn't relly actionable advice...
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- Sebb767 5y ago> Communication campaigns, making it a subject in schools... Both of those are basically so delayed and holey that you can forget using it for anything but the most basic points. Just look at how bad some people are at math and that's something both essential and taught extensively for basically the whole time one is in the education system.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- DangitBobby 5y agoThis is a good point. A large portion of people can't quite figure out how something so fundamental as fractions work.
- mr_toad 5y ago> Getting rid of fine grained details and communicating a lower entropy message inline with a crowd's biases also ensures it's more likely to survive in a form close to original intent. This sounds like Dawkins conception of a meme: an idea small enough to replicate as a whole without error.