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

Terry Pratchett warns Bill Gates about fake news (1995)

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 181 posts

Re: Terry Pratchett warns Bill Gates about fake news (1995)

#161

Post by astazangasta »

krapp wrote: post #131
astazangasta wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not clear to me how you are identifying "public" anxiety, as opposed to the anxiety of Washington. We can observe the latter in the behavior of Congress, e.g. The former is unclear. In any case, let's go with "anxiety". Why is there sudden anxiety? Why should we worry about Pizzagate now while we didn't worry about similar things two years ago? The answer is simple: Trump was elected. He is not alone; there is a…

>Why is there sudden anxiety? Why should we worry about Pizzagate now while we didn't worry about similar things two years ago? Because Pizzagate, along with other fake news, misinformation and slander campaigns, appear to have contributed in a nontrivial way to Trump's election, and all of them are by definition complete and utter bullshit. We should worry when obvious nonsense takes precedence in our political disc…

First, let me be clear that i am not on the right, I am on the left. The actual left, not the Resistance "left" that favors the national security state, perpetual war, income inequality, etc. From this perspective i see Russiagate as an attack on my (left) position: it is an attempt to drum up support for imperialism while simultaneously demonizing left critics of the establishment as "Putin sympathizers", etc.

The difference between this and Pizzagate was that Russiagate was promulgated by the NY Times, Wash Post, MSNBC, et al, while Pizzagate was, and remains, marginal. You suggest it contributed meaningfully to Trump's victory; I don't believe that. I think Trump won because he coopted a largely leftist critique of capitalism that resonated with Americans. This critique was also available in Sanders' campaign, which was marginalized in favor of Clinton's "things are fine, more of the same" message.

This is exactly what is happening everywhere else; Macron lost because he wanted to maintain the "there is no problem, we don't need to reform our ideas" pose. The result is people vote for the only folks offering change, even ersatz change: the right.

The appearance of these rightwing movements after the crash of 2008 is also not a coincidence. Neoliberalism is in crisis, serious crisis that goes well beyond a mere confusion over facts. People are looking for alternative facts in the first place because they are dissatisfied. The first, easiest place to find those answers is the fascist right.

So long as neoliberals continue to deny this crisis, continue to pretend their policies are good and should be popular, and continue to incorrectly blame "fake news" or "the Russians" for their woes, they will continue to lose elections, and real power, to a dangerous creeping fascism.

Re: Terry Pratchett warns Bill Gates about fake news (1995)

#162

Post by krapp »

ddxxdd wrote: post #159
krapp wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why is there sudden anxiety? Why should we worry about Pizzagate now while we didn't worry about similar things two years ago? Because Pizzagate, along with other fake news, misinformation and slander campaigns, appear to have contributed in a nontrivial way to Trump's election, and all of them are by definition complete and utter bullshit. We should worry when obvious nonsense takes precedence in our political disc…

>Because Pizzagate, along with other fake news, misinformation and slander campaigns, appear to have contributed in a nontrivial way to Trump's election, and all of them are by definition complete and utter bullshit. While keeping this discussion respectful, I would like to propose another hypothesis: that the rise of fake news may correspond severe distaste towards the direction that the country is heading. There ar…

>Can you imagine why they would be more likely to believe that those bureaucrats are involved in a child sex trafficking ring?

Honestly? No. And if I could, I still couldn't sympathize with them.

There is a big difference between having an honest disagreement about political policies and being willing to believe a politician is trafficking in child sex slaves and the occult. I wasn't happy about Obama or his policies, from the complete opposite end of the political spectrum being discussed here. I wanted an anti-war leftist, and got a pro-war centrist. But I still didn't believe he was a Muslim interloper who wanted to start a race war. I despised George W. Bush, but I don't believe he "did 9/11."

How would one go from "hearing that your daughter lost the track and field state championships to someone who used to be a boy" to Pizzagate? From "seeing violent criminals get away from cops because the cops were too afraid to do their job" to "The Clintons had Vince Foster killed?" There is no rational way to connect those dots.

Re: Terry Pratchett warns Bill Gates about fake news (1995)

#163

Post by treebeard901 »

blackflame7000 wrote: post #135
dmos62 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clocks are a great analogy. As pointed out, the problem is in verification. Say everyone has a clock and they're all showing different time. How do you actually get to the ground truth? Observe and measure planetary motion? That's too much hassle. This is where the analogy cracks a bit (or does it?). What you want is for your clock to show the same time as others' clocks do, so you join a group where you synchronize…

Truth is constant, lies are variable. With news, you need to look at stories that use different sources and find out the consistencies. The problem on the web is that so many articles are plagiarized or paraphrased from an original source like the AP.

> Truth is constant, lies are variable.

Is truth really constant though? The answer would probably depend on the domain being considered. Many things change over time and truth can change with them. So perhaps the core problem is that multiple contradictory “truths” can exist depending on ones point of view and ones point in time.

This would be separate from intentional misinformation which does tie into the debate. It seems likely that the modern problem of multiple clocks could just be a representation of different points of view.

Re: Terry Pratchett warns Bill Gates about fake news (1995)

#164

Post by manfredo »

blancheneige wrote: post #160
manfredo wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose if you're really want to be pedantic this wasn't completely limited to the church and monarchs. If enough people in a village wanted to suppress some information, or promulgate some falsehood, they could intimidate others into compliance. Plenty of Italian city-states had power structures more centered around wealthy merchants rather than nobility. So sure, it wasn't entirely limited to the church and nobil…

It's not being pedantic to point out that OP's assertion was false. Especially given the context of the thread. >The key observation (...) That was not his/her key observation though. I'm happy to argue with this one (anti-monarchist and anti-clerical libeling and propaganda has been a well-established business for centuries), but I was hoping someone could provide concrete examples regarding the original point inste…

> That was not his/her key observation though. I'm happy to argue with this one (anti-monarchist and anti-clerical libeling and propaganda has been a well-established business for centuries), but I was hoping someone could provide concrete examples regarding the original point instead of alluding to ill-defined historical events in the hope that the hazy understanding and possible bias of the reader would fill up the void. Very fake news-esque way of making a point by today's standard ;)

This isn't "anti-monarchist" or "anti-clerical". This is just the way the world worked before civil rights and the importance of objectivity developed as a concept. The Romans claimed the Carthaginians sacrificed children to their gods. Archaeological evidence found that most sacrifices were animals, and the small minority of human remains were newborn children (likely stillborn children) and the claims of child sacrifice are believed to be a blood libel. Greek historians provided impossibly high figures for some battles (e.g. claiming that Darius invaded Greece with a million soldiers). Many of the histories of battles in the Punic wars are believed to be inflated. Not surprising given that our main source, Polybius, was a client of the Scipios who were renowned for victories against Carthage as these larger numbers aggrandize their fame. Roman writers also claimed that the Huns were a barely-human race that could hardly speak, and were essentially animalistic (Greek and Roman writers actually wrote this about most nomadic people). I suppose none of us really know how the Huns behaved, but I highly doubt they would have managed to conquer much of Europe if they really were as described. A Byzantine emperor claimed to have defeated an incursion along the Danube that had large numbers of women fighting as soldiers who he paraded back in the capital (highly suspected that he captured female noncombatants and made up the story of them fighting to make his victory more exotic; there is no credible evidence of women fighting in any organized capacity before the modern era). Snorri, one of our primary sources on viking-age Scandinavians, is widely believed to have exaggerated pagan Scandinavians' violence, as he was a christian write and wanted to paint a contrast between the savage pagan Scandinavians and comparatively civil ones after conversion. Do I really need to go on?

In premodern times, the ability to communicate information broadly and record information was highly exclusive. Those that had this exclusive power often used it for their own gain. This is something that every responsible historian is aware of, and views many claims with suspicion especially if there's a potential motivation for bias in the author. I am very surprised to see this claim being called "fake news-esque". This is something I thought every high-school graduate was aware of.

> Sharing overlap while having disjoint components does not make two definitions equal. Especially for an anachronistic term that's awkwardly trying to be applied retroactively in the present discussion. There already exist well-defined terms for what you are referring to, why not call them that.

True "fake news" is an awkward thing to apply to premodern times, since the idea of "news" is a highly modern concept. But it's perfectly clear that the people in this comment chain are using the term to refer to misinformation, particularly intentionally spread misinformation that benefits the one spreading it.

Re: Terry Pratchett warns Bill Gates about fake news (1995)

#165

Post by al_chemist »

How do we know that "Terry Pratchett warns Bill Gates about fake news (1995)" is not fake news? Author says it's in "GQ (UK edition), July 1995, p21", but before now, I've never heard about GQ and I've no way to acquire it. QC wikipedia doesn't even mention Gates nor Pratchett.

Pratchett wikipedia never mentions Gates nor GQ. It mention "he was the UK's best-selling author of the 1990s" and as a best-selling author, would he work for beauty-and-fashion magazine?

Re: Terry Pratchett warns Bill Gates about fake news (1995)

#166

Post by vanderZwan »

al_chemist wrote: post #165

How do we know that "Terry Pratchett warns Bill Gates about fake news (1995)" is not fake news? Author says it's in "GQ (UK edition), July 1995, p21", but before now, I've never heard about GQ and I've no way to acquire it. QC wikipedia doesn't even mention Gates nor Pratchett. Pratchett wikipedia never mentions Gates nor GQ. It mention "he was the UK's best-selling author of the 1990s" and as a best-selling author,…

You could start by clicking on the actual links and seeing that there are photos of the magazine in question in the tweets.

Re: Terry Pratchett warns Bill Gates about fake news (1995)

#167

Post by dragonwriter »

al_chemist wrote: post #165

How do we know that "Terry Pratchett warns Bill Gates about fake news (1995)" is not fake news? Author says it's in "GQ (UK edition), July 1995, p21", but before now, I've never heard about GQ and I've no way to acquire it. QC wikipedia doesn't even mention Gates nor Pratchett. Pratchett wikipedia never mentions Gates nor GQ. It mention "he was the UK's best-selling author of the 1990s" and as a best-selling author,…

> but before now, I've never heard about GQ and I've no way to acquire it.

https://www.crazyaboutmagazines.com/ourshop/cat_56713-GQ-UK-...

Re: Terry Pratchett warns Bill Gates about fake news (1995)

#168

Post by theoh »

dTal wrote: post #63
theoh wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are exaggerating the expertise of both men. Gates was successful, but that doesn't mean he had rock-solid knowledge of all aspects of business and technology. Pratchett wrote humorous fiction, but that doesn't make him an expert on sociology. Pratchett's comment didn't require a lot of insight to come up with—it's just the (essentially reactionary) observation that publishing on the internet is a free-for…

And I think you're being a little unfair to Terry. Sure, he wrote humorous fiction, but his grasp of human behavior is the source of much of the observational humor of his books. They are, essentially, spoofs of society.

This is like the argument that comedians who make funny jokes about human nature must therefore have good insight into politics. Anyone who watches comedy knows that the ability to be funny doesn't equate to having a good analysis of the situation.

Re: Terry Pratchett warns Bill Gates about fake news (1995)

#169

Post by mbostleman »

krapp wrote: post #48
coldtea wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Fake news has always been with us and the internet just propagates it along with everything else. Contrary to the claim that the internet legitimized it, it made us more aware of how common it is, delegitimizing all news sources in the way that multiple clocks delegitimize clocks. It's also that those in power would love it for their opinions to be the "authoritative" ones and only ones permitted to be heard. Same…

The narrative you're expressing, that the mainstream media as a complex exists to further propaganda on the part of the "elites" and that only the web has been able to provide an honest and unbiased form of news is undermining the actual subject at hand, which is the degree to which the web and those unwashed masses are being employed as tools for propaganda by the same elites. The implicit (and arguable unjustified)…

Yes, but while the Internet has resulted in more propaganda, it has also resulted in more opportunities for clarification and other sides of the story to at least be available. Your story may not make it through the FANG gauntlet of algorithms and, as such, a mass audience may not see it, but it feels to me like alternative angles are way more available now than they were in the 90's and before.

Re: Terry Pratchett warns Bill Gates about fake news (1995)

#170

Post by blackflame7000 »

treebeard901 wrote: post #163
blackflame7000 wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Truth is constant, lies are variable. With news, you need to look at stories that use different sources and find out the consistencies. The problem on the web is that so many articles are plagiarized or paraphrased from an original source like the AP.

> Truth is constant, lies are variable. Is truth really constant though? The answer would probably depend on the domain being considered. Many things change over time and truth can change with them. So perhaps the core problem is that multiple contradictory “truths” can exist depending on ones point of view and ones point in time. This would be separate from intentional misinformation which does tie into the debate.…

Let's make a distinction between universal truths as you described and local truths that are defined as an accurate retelling of the events that unfolded at a certain time at a given place. That cannot change with time as its already been "recorded"
Post reply on HN