3 ms·

I don’t think that’s fair at all; he’s pointing out a critical flaw — the trust being given out today is given blindly; he’s just pointing out how trivially any

by setr 4y ago

I don’t think that’s fair at all; he’s pointing out a critical flaw — the trust being given out today is given blindly; he’s just pointing out how trivially anyone can participate in that abuse, and with such a low barrier to entry, we should assume there are many malicious actors already executing on it. Fine, he hasn’t given a solution beyond find better experts, but you’re basically just blaming the messenger; the trust has already been broken, you just don’t know it yet. And the trust-breakers are those experts and verification systems, that don’t actually do any verification. Your advisors aren’t doing their jobs. And you’re cursing him for showing it to you? Or because the sham should continue uninterrupted? We don’t have a system of trust but verify; we just pretend to.

sriram_malhar 4y ago
No, he's not a messenger. He's the source of a fresh new mistruth. I don't need more ugliness to know that there is ugliness in the world, so yes, I am cursing him. Bild does enough trashy journalism that it doesn't need help.
- setr 4y ago
  I think if it were obvious to all onlookers that the bild can’t be trusted anyways, then him acting as new source would be completely a non-issue; no one trusts the bild anyways. He’s not really a source of mistruth any more than a raving lunatic babbling away in the outskirts of town. If that’s not the case, and people do trust the bild, then acting as source is problematic; but it seems to me that exposing the lack of trustworthiness is then important and unambiguously a net positive — at least if it reaches the same people who’ve been tricked in the first place.
  - MandieD 4y ago
    “… no one trusts the bild anyways.” They might not say they trust it, but they sure do unironically read it all over rural Bavaria and in every little Gasthaus, even in the cities.
  - lupire 4y ago
    > exposing the lack of trustworthiness There not happening. Th people who spread fake news (on purpose or ignorantly as A/B automatons) have no interest in publishing proof that they are misbehaving.

by setr 4y ago

sriram_malhar 4y ago

No, he's not a messenger. He's the source of a fresh new mistruth. I don't need more ugliness to know that there is ugliness in the world, so yes, I am cursing him. Bild does enough trashy journalism that it doesn't need help.

setr 4y ago
I think if it were obvious to all onlookers that the bild can’t be trusted anyways, then him acting as new source would be completely a non-issue; no one trusts the bild anyways. He’s not really a source of mistruth any more than a raving lunatic babbling away in the outskirts of town. If that’s not the case, and people do trust the bild, then acting as source is problematic; but it seems to me that exposing the lack of trustworthiness is then important and unambiguously a net positive — at least if it reaches the same people who’ve been tricked in the first place.
- MandieD 4y ago
  “… no one trusts the bild anyways.” They might not say they trust it, but they sure do unironically read it all over rural Bavaria and in every little Gasthaus, even in the cities.
- lupire 4y ago
  > exposing the lack of trustworthiness There not happening. Th people who spread fake news (on purpose or ignorantly as A/B automatons) have no interest in publishing proof that they are misbehaving.