3 ms·

You've lept to a conclusion about what I trust and then how that putative trust drives my reasoning. I'm not the imaginary person you are addressing. > I trust

You've lept to a conclusion about what I trust and then how that putative trust drives my reasoning. I'm not the imaginary person you are addressing. > I trust HN discussions much more since there are plenty of people who will weigh in when things are wrong or misrepresented, unlike these articles. Why are those people, with no responsibility, little expertise, etc., more trustworthy than other people? It seems like the common bias of social media - for some reason, people trust strangers with no credibility, which exposes them to the enormous amount of misinformation and just BS that now floods our world. If the article author or a professor wrote the same thing in a HN comment, it seems like you'd believe it.

Jensson 3y ago
> Why are those people, with no responsibility, little expertise, etc., more trustworthy than other people? I don't trust them, I trust the discussion in aggregate. The discussion includes people on all sides in a healthy forum. If you are on a subreddit you are in an echo chamber so many voices will be missing, but HN has good representation of experts and people from all sorts of fields so I trust these discussions to unearth better truths than what a typical journalist can. > If the article author or a professor wrote the same thing in a HN comment, it seems like you'd believe it. No, if they wrote the article in a comment with that headline it would get comments saying why it is wrong, just like here. The ability for people like you to object is why I trust it more.
- wolverine876 3y ago
  Do you see what social media has wrought? How can you trust the herd mentality? Is there a greater source of misinformation, disinformation, and ignorance in the history of humanity? (No.) Regarding things I already know - or even OPs I've read but which most commenters have not - HN is mostly misinformation. I participate in HN, obviously - only because I've found nothing better (a complement to it, in a way, and maybe there's no known way to improve).
  - Jensson 3y ago
    I'm not sure what you mean? There are commenters here who are wrong, yes. But the discussion in aggregate usually have some people who are correct. Those people are missing in these articles, these articles are mostly just a person who is wrong about a lot of things. There are some nuggets of truths in them but you can't trust any sensational headlines to be representative of what actually happened. If you are saying that most discussions here on HN have zero people who are right, then I strongly disagree. It is very rare for there to be no truths in HN discussions. On reddit however it is very common for me to see not a single reasonable post to be found.
    - wolverine876 3y ago
      How do you know which comments are accurate? Plenty of research shows that, without expertise yourself, people are awful at that judgment.

Jensson 3y ago

> Why are those people, with no responsibility, little expertise, etc., more trustworthy than other people? I don't trust them, I trust the discussion in aggregate. The discussion includes people on all sides in a healthy forum. If you are on a subreddit you are in an echo chamber so many voices will be missing, but HN has good representation of experts and people from all sorts of fields so I trust these discussions to unearth better truths than what a typical journalist can. > If the article author or a professor wrote the same thing in a HN comment, it seems like you'd believe it. No, if they wrote the article in a comment with that headline it would get comments saying why it is wrong, just like here. The ability for people like you to object is why I trust it more.

wolverine876 3y ago
Do you see what social media has wrought? How can you trust the herd mentality? Is there a greater source of misinformation, disinformation, and ignorance in the history of humanity? (No.) Regarding things I already know - or even OPs I've read but which most commenters have not - HN is mostly misinformation. I participate in HN, obviously - only because I've found nothing better (a complement to it, in a way, and maybe there's no known way to improve).
- Jensson 3y ago
  I'm not sure what you mean? There are commenters here who are wrong, yes. But the discussion in aggregate usually have some people who are correct. Those people are missing in these articles, these articles are mostly just a person who is wrong about a lot of things. There are some nuggets of truths in them but you can't trust any sensational headlines to be representative of what actually happened. If you are saying that most discussions here on HN have zero people who are right, then I strongly disagree. It is very rare for there to be no truths in HN discussions. On reddit however it is very common for me to see not a single reasonable post to be found.
  - wolverine876 3y ago
    How do you know which comments are accurate? Plenty of research shows that, without expertise yourself, people are awful at that judgment.