3 ms·

but what about the many years after? the sobering up? bottom up consequences? i'm part Ukranian. Raised in Germany. My family's social circle is huge. Almost n

but what about the many years after? the sobering up? bottom up consequences? i'm part Ukranian. Raised in Germany. My family's social circle is huge. Almost none of the Ukrainians left Ukraine. And almost none of those live in the east. Some fled to the country side but are already back in what the German media portrait as war zones. my elders gave up. They say that if the higher classes don't care, nothing can be done. and their German friends believe the news instead of calls between brothers and sisters who've been talking almost weekly for the last 30 years. the same with the Russian side. And only few hardliners support the war. their logic is shared by a majority of the Ukrainians. and i can't make up my freaking mind. did they sell out their country? many Ukrainians say people votes for Selensky because they knew he would bring the war. Amd when I checked the data, Selensky got only 30 something % of Ukrainians on his side, which is standard given how many people don't vote at all. then you check the news and studies and humanitarian reports dating back into the nineties and you think you realize what the hell is going on but the media turn everything 100 degrees and the voices that advocated for the truth suddenly switch sides. WHAT. and it seems even worse with Israel-Palestine. i don't know how to deal with how well-doing people like hackers and engineers and scientists deal with how the media and politicians treat the truth. and it hurts

AnthonyMouse 3y ago
> the voices that advocated for the truth suddenly switch sides. WHAT. The media is people. Bias is the default. Sometimes the bias of one organization aligns with the truth, on some issue. That doesn't mean it will on every issue, or will tomorrow if it did yesterday. Objective reporting is rare. And the reason for that is that it's hard to distinguish. The reason you're watching it on a screen is that you aren't there and you don't know what the truth is, so you're trusting someone else to faithfully convey what's happening. How do you know if they don't? Sometimes it's more obvious than others. The truth is always logically consistent with reality. It's possible because it happened. Whereas lies have no such constraint. So you can detect lies -- sometimes -- because they contradict themselves. It's the same reason authors publish a novel and then get letters from readers telling them all the mistakes they made -- fiction is inconsistent with reality because otherwise it wouldn't be fiction. And so the more inconsistencies you detect with someone's reporting, the less you trust them. But that's just a heuristic. Someone tells the truth 95% of the time, that doesn't tell you which 5% is a lie. Someone lies 95% of the time, that doesn't tell you which 5% is the truth. We want to pretend we can know for sure, but that's not how it is. Then nihilists want to claim that you can't know anything so you might as well give up, but that's not how it is either. Being 95% sure isn't the same as being 40% sure.

AnthonyMouse 3y ago

> the voices that advocated for the truth suddenly switch sides. WHAT. The media is people. Bias is the default. Sometimes the bias of one organization aligns with the truth, on some issue. That doesn't mean it will on every issue, or will tomorrow if it did yesterday. Objective reporting is rare. And the reason for that is that it's hard to distinguish. The reason you're watching it on a screen is that you aren't there and you don't know what the truth is, so you're trusting someone else to faithfully convey what's happening. How do you know if they don't? Sometimes it's more obvious than others. The truth is always logically consistent with reality. It's possible because it happened. Whereas lies have no such constraint. So you can detect lies -- sometimes -- because they contradict themselves. It's the same reason authors publish a novel and then get letters from readers telling them all the mistakes they made -- fiction is inconsistent with reality because otherwise it wouldn't be fiction. And so the more inconsistencies you detect with someone's reporting, the less you trust them. But that's just a heuristic. Someone tells the truth 95% of the time, that doesn't tell you which 5% is a lie. Someone lies 95% of the time, that doesn't tell you which 5% is the truth. We want to pretend we can know for sure, but that's not how it is. Then nihilists want to claim that you can't know anything so you might as well give up, but that's not how it is either. Being 95% sure isn't the same as being 40% sure.