Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus

zapatopi.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 177 posts

Re: The Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus

#51

Post by hoosieree »

BaseballPhysics wrote: post #39
replygirl wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there's a lot of arrogance in the claim that anyone should be able to easily and automatically rule out the existence of some species based on their personal knowledge some, certainly yes. i don't think anyone would disagree that some claims are more plainly ridiculous than others. i'm replying to someone who let themselves be convinced the tree octopus was real by a page picturing an octopus climbing a tree. let's…

I think you'll find your idea of "common sense" is perhaps not so universal as you think. For example, why is a tree octopus any less likely than the platypus, a venomous aquatic mammal that has a beak, lays eggs, and detects prey by sensing electric fields like a shark?

Platypus seriously? If you're going to make up an animal, at least try to give it a realistic sounding name.

Re: The Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus

#53

Post by brendev »

I used to teach a computer science class to elementary-middle school kids.

I always did a week on internet literacy, and would open the lesson with a worksheet that included this fella, along with a number of other fake animals, and some that look fake, but aren't.

Each kid was supposed to come up with a summary of what the animal was, where they live, what they eat, etc.

It was a lot of fun, but I've got to say... Parents: please take some time to teach your kids how to critically evaluate information that they read online.

Re: The Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus

#54

Post by replygirl »

BaseballPhysics wrote: post #46
replygirl wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

call me arrogant but i won't stoop to the level i have to be at to take your question seriously. do i think i'm as intelligent as anyone, or that everyone is as intelligent as me? of course not. but i do think your standard for gullibility is too high if you don't think believing the linked article satisfies it.

Stoop? I challenge you with a perfectly valid example of an unlikely animal, and your response is to claim I'm somehow, what, failing to argue at your level? I suppose that's enough to make my point for me.

you asked me how i would ascertain that an animal documented to exist is more likely to be real than a hypothetical animal depicted with _a photoshop of a different animal climbing a tree_, as if there is no reasonable expectation of intelligence or intuition for an abled, functioning adult

the difference between people who initially believed this and those who didn't is gullibility, and this is a great example of gullibility because of how outlandish the claim is and appears to be. that's all i'm arguing. the counteraguments i see boil down to "but if someone is gullible enough, they'll think it's actually not outlandish and accept it on face value" which is not contrary to what i'm saying.

if you were one of the gullible ones, sorry! sucks to be more deficient than others in some way, but we all have deficiencies.

Re: The Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus

#56

Post by Teever »

oatmeal1 wrote: post #18
blamazon wrote: post #2

I don't mean to spoil the fun, downvote me if this is not in the spirit, but it took me way too long to figure this out and others may be as slow as me and save some time by reading this comment: > The Pacific Northwest tree octopus is an Internet hoax created in 1998 by a humor writer under the pseudonym Lyle Zapato. Since its creation, the Pacific Northwest tree octopus website has been commonly referenced in Inter…

> I don't mean to spoil the fun, downvote me if this is not in the spirit, but it took me way too long to figure this out and others may be as slow as me and save some time by reading this comment: I believed it too. The thing is, this is something no one is really incentivized to lie about. If some website says "politician did X", then your lie detector turns on, because it's worth it for lots of websites to lie or…

> this is something no one is really incentivized to lie about.

'Click here to donate to my gofund me to save the amphibious octopus.'

Re: The Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus

#57

Post by tshaddox »

oatmeal1 wrote: post #18
blamazon wrote: post #2

I don't mean to spoil the fun, downvote me if this is not in the spirit, but it took me way too long to figure this out and others may be as slow as me and save some time by reading this comment: > The Pacific Northwest tree octopus is an Internet hoax created in 1998 by a humor writer under the pseudonym Lyle Zapato. Since its creation, the Pacific Northwest tree octopus website has been commonly referenced in Inter…

> I don't mean to spoil the fun, downvote me if this is not in the spirit, but it took me way too long to figure this out and others may be as slow as me and save some time by reading this comment: I believed it too. The thing is, this is something no one is really incentivized to lie about. If some website says "politician did X", then your lie detector turns on, because it's worth it for lots of websites to lie or…

If no one is incentivized to lie about it, is anyone incentivized to tell the truth about it?

Re: The Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus

#58

Post by stephenr »

MattGaiser wrote: post #23
oatmeal1 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't mean to spoil the fun, downvote me if this is not in the spirit, but it took me way too long to figure this out and others may be as slow as me and save some time by reading this comment: I believed it too. The thing is, this is something no one is really incentivized to lie about. If some website says "politician did X", then your lie detector turns on, because it's worth it for lots of websites to lie or…

Add in that the animal world is full of wacky creatures that don't fit heuristic models for plausibility. People thought the Platypus was a hoax was it was initially discovered. It is real.

People still call the dropbear a hoax.

Re: The Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus

#59

Post by stephenr »

freitzkriesler2 wrote: post #34
blamazon wrote: post #2

I don't mean to spoil the fun, downvote me if this is not in the spirit, but it took me way too long to figure this out and others may be as slow as me and save some time by reading this comment: > The Pacific Northwest tree octopus is an Internet hoax created in 1998 by a humor writer under the pseudonym Lyle Zapato. Since its creation, the Pacific Northwest tree octopus website has been commonly referenced in Inter…

It's the Washington Oregon version of the Dropbear.

Droptopus?

Re: The Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus

#60

Post by BowBun »

oatmeal1 wrote: post #18
blamazon wrote: post #2

I don't mean to spoil the fun, downvote me if this is not in the spirit, but it took me way too long to figure this out and others may be as slow as me and save some time by reading this comment: > The Pacific Northwest tree octopus is an Internet hoax created in 1998 by a humor writer under the pseudonym Lyle Zapato. Since its creation, the Pacific Northwest tree octopus website has been commonly referenced in Inter…

> I don't mean to spoil the fun, downvote me if this is not in the spirit, but it took me way too long to figure this out and others may be as slow as me and save some time by reading this comment: I believed it too. The thing is, this is something no one is really incentivized to lie about. If some website says "politician did X", then your lie detector turns on, because it's worth it for lots of websites to lie or…

> And I especially don't think it means anything about gullibility about information found online

You really think it means absolutely _nothing_ about this topic? It's literally an example of people believing what they read online! I think you're having an overly defensive reaction to probably falling for it.

> It would be very hard to go through life questioning the veracity of every inconsequential bit of information that no one has an incentive to lie about

The issue is you may not understand or fathom the reasons someone may lie about something. Imagine the strange traditions that leaders have maintained throughout history to help control their subjects. To those subjects, I'm sure they weren't even imagining that these things they thought were spiritual were just fictions.

As for my point - yes you should try go through life with a certain level of curiosity and apprehension when people tell you things. I feel like a lot of our societal issues are a result of things continuing for no good reason, just because we've done it in the past. It's become fairly easy to fact-check, and while not popular at parties, it's important if you're actually trying to learn and build an accurate mental model.

If people were more comfortable questioning all aspects of our society (and if society was receptive to the criticism), I feel like we would be better off.

Post reply on HN