Live data from Hacker News

Persuasion through status rather than argument

robkhenderson.com

41–50 of 251 posts

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#41
I was nodding a lot reading this piece, but something did seem incongruous.

The author claims "peripheral route" opinions are becoming more common because of information overload and the need to be parsimonious when forming opinions. He also claims that peripheral route opinions are more weakly held than central route opinions.

How does that account for increasing ideological polarization, when you would expect people's opinions to shift more with the breeze?

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's nothing physically impossible about the Hyperloop (basically a maglev in vacuum tube, nothing wrong with the tech, just not particularly economical). Maglevs have been deployed successfully in some parts of Asia, they are just dreadfully expensive and nimbys have fears about radiation but they are hardly new technology.

Note that the main point about the hyperloop was the vacuum tube, not the maglev part. And the vacuum tube doesn't actually work. It's not actually feasible to create a vacuum tube hundreds of km long. It's just about physically possible, but it's not really technologically feasible - not for a system that is supposed to be in constant operation all year long. It's also important to remember that vacuum tube trains a…

And besides that you don't have to have a really good vacuum, you just have to have a 'good enough' vacuum that you can attain high speed without losing the stabilizing effect of a bunch of air constrained by the walls of a tube. Bonus points of you can get the air to move at a speed a bit slower than your vehicle, more bonus points if you can use the air to propel your vehicle.

But: it's probably still a dumb idea, but one that is borderline.

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#43
post #33

[flagged]

Calling precautions superfluous after the uncertainty is gone is not clever.

It was known early that covid was rarely spread outdoors, but it took a long time for rules and recommendations to catch up to that, especially in Australia IIRC.

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#44

[flagged]

Before we had vaccines, covid was killing more people than heart attacks and car accidents. Combined. Deriding people for caring about their own safety is callous and puerile.

Evem worse, masks work better for others than yourself. What came a bit as shock during COVId for me, was how little people cared for each other, that people couldn't even bothered with the smallest inconveniences to do something good for everyone. I am a cynic, but didn't that level egoism.

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which smart people believed in infinite compression algorithms or true perpetual motion?

Various folks into the 21st century. Edit: point taken. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_perpetual_motion_...

The replies don't make a ton of sense, did you change the contents of your comment?

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On that note, the entire LK-99 debacle.

But super conductors do exist and room temperature superconductors may be possible. Nobody has ruled that out at all.

Yeah but why did so many people take those guys so seriously before their work was replicated? Shouldn’t extraordinary claims be filtered early before we give them the time of day?

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#47
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Communism is one of the worst ideas, with the worst track records, and have always captured the most intelligent people, even today. A casual browse through HN comments is enough evidence.

You're probably one of those people who read any criticism of capitalism as a cry for communism.

We should reject the false idea that it's either capitalism or communism. Capitalism is a crucial step for a society to take in order to be sufficiently vulnerable to fall for a communist revolution. Marx goes into great detail about this.

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#48
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Communism is one of the worst ideas, with the worst track records, and have always captured the most intelligent people, even today. A casual browse through HN comments is enough evidence.

You're probably one of those people who read any criticism of capitalism as a cry for communism.

I don't read any criticism of capitalism because there is basically none. 99% of it is just people claiming that some abstract bad thing in human society is due to "capitalism" without any sort of argument that would actually rise to the level of what I would call criticism.

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#49
We should not conflate what is ostensibly “intelligence” with wisdom, virtue, and character. Without genuine virtue, the mind cannot function properly. Without a spine, without virtue, temptations to throw the truth under the bus for the sake of lesser goods easily overwhelm. It leads to the misuse and abuse of intelligence. It leads to skillful evasion of the truth. It leads to rationalization rather than reason. The author gives us one example.

It’s not his wealth, objectively a good thing, that prevents a rich man from getting into heaven, it is his prioritization of it over superior goods, his idolatry even. And riches come in many forms.

Re: Persuasion through status rather than argument

#50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On that note, the entire LK-99 debacle.

But super conductors do exist and room temperature superconductors may be possible. Nobody has ruled that out at all.

You are missing the point of the article.

People gobbled it up with the justification that random researchers on twitter "replicated" the results under the assumption that these anonymous researchers are putting their entire career on the line and therefore should be paid attention to. That is literally playing into the point the article is making. I.e. people believing lies because the information came from a higher status individual.

Post reply on HN