4 ms·
The problem is that HN will typically be the only place that will debunk these news stories and distill them into facts as opposed to sensationalism. I am also
by skilled 3y ago
The problem is that HN will typically be the only place that will debunk these news stories and distill them into facts as opposed to sensationalism.
I am also surprised you put the Verge in there but not Ars. The latter having fallen down the cliff in recent years and not doing a lot of original reporting despite their budget.
- h_o_o_t 3y agoIt's a fair point but I think you must weigh that against what you principally want to occupy yourself with for that session. Given that the number of comments are still visible, you can still see the hot topics, and then try to read the title from the tab. But I've actually found myself not doing that anyway. Regarding the list, it's non-exhaustive.
- tonymet 3y agoWhy’s this comment flagged?
- prohobo 3y agoI think we've entered an era where this isn't worth the mental toll anymore. Especially as LLMs ramp up in adoption, the internet is becoming one giant demoralising psyop. I'm more interested in filtering and minimizing the impact rather than trying to engage with it.
- solardev 3y agoI'm not sure that humans evolved to be able to do anything useful with continuous, real-time, globalized information anyway. So what if 6.99999 billion of us can instantly learn about the atrocities committed by the evilest 10,000 or so? What is there to do about it anyway? The overwhelming majority of us just process it into some vague us vs them emotion, internalize it as either "oh that's nice" or "those bastards", and then move on with our lives anyway, after losing a bit more faith in humanity. Lies, lies, and the occasional fact-check... does it materially change anything at all?