6 ms·
A number of people predicted this in the thread the other day: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44859807 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44859807 It'
by AlotOfReading 1y ago
A number of people predicted this in the thread the other day:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44859807 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44859807
It'll be interesting to see if the situation evolves further.
- perihelions 1y agoAnd at least 222 people believed it to be true (or else those are some illogical upvotes).
- mlok 1y agoAn upvote does not mean the user believes the story is true.
- perihelions 1y agoThen they are illogically boosting a hoax on purpose, or at least with reckless disregard for truth.
- vpribish 1y agoOr not engaging enough to come to any conclusion - just chuckle - upvote. Useful, but not idiots nor villains
- zahlman 1y agoJust because you don't consciously believe something to be true, doesn't mean you don't care about its veracity. The null hypothesis is that people are willing to treat things as true based on their priors — which could be informed by things as simple as "this was posted on a website not known as a den of misinformation, and shared on HN" — while not actually devoting thought to an investigation of the truth.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- nailer 1y ago> "this was posted on a website not known as a den of misinformation, and shared on HN" I don't know whether you mean Threads or Bluesky but it sounds like you haven't used either.
- natch 1y agoYeah I have peeked into both and have never seen such a strident collection of vituperation, misinformation, and hatred. For people who claim to have left Twitter due to supposed toxicity, they definitely seem unacquainted with mirrors.
- username332211 1y agoOr they want knowledge of the hoax to spread, so as to protect the victim against further lies?
- pengaru 1y agoIf your goal is to burn down tesla/musk, you logically promote everything remotely damaging. And there are plenty rational reasons to have that goal.
- dkiebd 1y agoIt’s funny that I just read the thread on rationalism and then come back to this one and someone posted this flawed nonsense.
- zahlman 1y agoMany of the people who suspected the story to be a fake were... not very well received in that thread, at least at first.
- nailer 1y agoSince HN is manually unflagging political posts, and not enforcing the 'uses HN for political advocacy' guideline the site is generally more combatative and there's a lot more hoaxes and conspiracy theories on the front page.
- gonzobonzo 1y agoI've noticed this as well. It feels more and more like Reddit everyday.
- modeless 1y agoThe problem with having a site-wide rule against complaining that the site is becoming Reddit is that when it actually becomes true you're prohibited from telling the truth.
- robocat 1y agoThere is no site-wide prohibition - which is obvious since these comments would be prohibited. There are guidelines and each guideline is mostly loosely encouraged by the community here by downvoting - in effect becoming community standards. However a well written exception can receive upvotes (even though strictly against guidelines) because it is a community and individual judgement mostly gets priority. Flagging is different because it is a much stronger signal of violation of norms, however it is still mostly a signal from the HN user community. The moderation balance on HN appears to be quite functional to me (although I'm happy with many guidelines that others fight against). Just my opinion on the topic.
- ameliaquining 1y agoI read the thread when it had something like 50 comments, and most of them were treating it as either confirmed or at least potentially true, and using it as an opportunity to rail against corporate abuse in full generality, just like every HN thread about a negative story about a tech company. It was only later that the skeptical comments started to rise to the top.
- motorest 1y ago> I read the thread when it had something like 50 comments, and most of them were treating it as either confirmed or at least potentially true (...) I think you're trying to fabricate an alternative version of reality while being aware that the facts (i.e., the actual posts in the thread) are not on your side.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- potato3732842 1y agoThe best part is that if the alleged reality is true it's an even bigger condemnation of the community. "no, they didn't believe it, they were engaging in strategic trolling and vote gaming" as if that doesn't imply a way more malicious frame of mind than some hapless idiot looking at the message and going "yup, seems legit, upvote we go". (disclaimer: I wasn't in those comments, IDK who's reality is true here)
- aydyn 1y ago>(disclaimer: I wasn't in those comments, IDK who's reality is true here) As someone who did see that thread evolve, let me help you out. HN (being largely comprised of redditors) were more than happy to amplify pure misinformation because it was politically expedient. The evidence that it was fake was given fairly early on; a lot of people ignored it. It's certainly a condemnation of the userbase on this forum.
- ameliaquining 1y ago
- thebruce87m 1y agoExactly - they might have something to gain by convincing others it is true for example.
- kimbernator 1y agoThere are non-nefarious reasons, too. If someone is unsure whether something is real they could upvote it to increase visibility and discussion.
- deepsun 1y agoAccording to HN guidelines, upvotes means something that sparks curiosity.
- pilingual 1y ago[dead]
- armchairhacker 1y agohttps://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/aaaah https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/aaaah
- jameslk 1y agoThank you for this comic. It addresses a feeling I experience a lot on the internet
- bboygravity 1y agoIf Tesla weren't constantly attacked as a supposed shady company by NYT and the rest of the psyop propaganda machine it wouldn't have gotten so many upvotes.
- gamblor956 1y agoIf Tesla's owner didn't have a history of lying, and the company didn't have a history of attempting to evade legal disclosure obligations, people wouldn't think of it as a shady company.
- ipython 1y agoTotally not the actions of a shady company with cowboy culture built in from the top: https://www.reuters.com/technology/tesla-workers-shared-sensitive-images-recorded-by-customer-cars-2023-04-06/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/tesla-workers-shared-sens...
- general1726 1y ago[flagged]
- natch 1y agoMore like it's on brand with the fantastic delusions people have about Musk. In reality Tesla and Musk are very good about privacy and leaving control with the user. But, you do you.
- gamblor956 1y agoReminded of all those times that Musk had Tesla release crash details on X pinning the blame on the driver when it was in Tesla's interest to shift the blame for crashes. Yep, great commitment to privacy there. You know what automakers don't do that? Literally every other automaker. When they release those kinds of details, they do so in response to a court proceeding as part of the legal discovery process so that privacy concerns, etc. can be dealt with before the information is released.
- protimewaster 1y agoPlus, they supposedly had it turn off the automatic features just before it detected an imminent crash, ensuring that they could always correctly tell everyone that "Auto Pilot was off at the time of the crash". Of course, that doesn't mean that it wasn't used in the 20 seconds prior. So, those details weren't actually insightful. They were just PR bullshit.
- general1726 1y agoLike spying people on internal cameras and then sharing it? https://www.reuters.com/technology/tesla-workers-shared-sensitive-images-recorded-by-customer-cars-2023-04-06/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/tesla-workers-shared-sens...
- scottbez1 1y agoThis statement "Tesla and Musk are very good about privacy and leaving control with the user" is pretty clearly false [1]: > between 2019 and 2022, groups of Tesla employees privately shared via an internal messaging system sometimes highly invasive videos and images recorded by customers’ car cameras, according to interviews by Reuters with nine former employees. [1] https://www.reuters.com/technology/tesla-workers-shared-sensitive-images-recorded-by-customer-cars-2023-04-06/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/tesla-workers-shared-sens...
- ufmace 1y agoWell I see it's flagged for now, and I was one of the flaggers. IMO, at least by the time I saw it, there were more than enough red flags raised to say that having it on HN before more evidence is available is only flamebait.
- LastTrain 1y agoEvolves further how? What do you expect might happen next?
- AlotOfReading 1y agoAs I said in that thread (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44860077 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44860077), seems like a slam-dunk defamation case for Tesla (assuming they want to pursue it) if the whole thing was fabricated.
- aaronbaugher 1y agoNothing new under the sun. Remember when NBC admitted to rigging a truck to burst into flames in a crash for Dateline, because it wouldn't do it on its own? Or when a jury found that Consumer Reports lied about how easily an Isuzu pickup rolled over on turns? But hey, the media probably wouldn't lie these days, and Musk bad man.
- bmicraft 1y agoJust because other people are bad doesn't make Musk suddenly good
- amarcheschi 1y agoI'm the one who posted a similar post that wasn't removed. The actions of the ceo in the past would not make this event unreasonable imho
- slg 1y agoIt if funny to phrase it like that as if you weren't one of the people in that thread arguing against those skeptical people pointing out issues with the accusations. [1] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44859991 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44859991
- AlotOfReading 1y agoAnything using Ockham's razor is a statement about what's more likely when you don't know the truth. Those priors were obviously wrong. I also said we'd find out shortly if it was faked, and now we're here. Do you think I shouldn't update my understanding based on new information?
- slg 1y ago>Those priors were obviously wrong. You're doing it again here with the passive voice. You weren't wrong, it was "Ockham's razor" and "those priors" that were wrong. >Do you think I shouldn't update my understanding based on new information? Your responses here show that you aren't actually doing that. You aren't taking any responsibility for your prior incorrect assumptions and therefore you are likely to continue making similar wrong assumptions in the future. How can you learn from this experience if you can't admit that you did anything wrong?
- AlotOfReading 1y agoI don't know what you want from me. Yes, my speculation on incomplete information was wrong. That's obvious to anyone who can read. I haven't hidden it, I haven't said I was ever correct, and even in that thread I explicitly said there are two possibilities and here's the one I find more likely. Yet you're acting like I kicked a puppy and need to apologize for my moral failings. Chill, it's not a big deal. I'll probably be wrong about something else in the future too. All I can do is update my understanding and try not to make the same mistakes going forward.
- slg 1y ago