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

The “misinformation problem” seems like misinformation

slowboring.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 355 posts

Re: The “misinformation problem” seems like misinformation

#211

Post by inglor_cz »

feurio wrote: post #192
inglor_cz wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the OP, but "holier than thou" is not a positive human type.

Neither is it exclusive to the woke, or anyone else. What I would really like to see is a concrete example, which so far everyone has declined to give. It's customary to provide some actual evidence to back up claims. "Your honor, the defendant killed the victim in cold blood" "I see, proceed with your evidence" "Meh, go find it for yourself."

It is not exclusive to the woke, no.

"I am a better parent / patriot / Christian / anti-racist / Aryan / communist / whatever than you." seems to be remarkably universal. Some people just love to create ladders of virtue and vice.

But at certain times, one of those prevails. IDK if you were alive immediately after 9/11. That was a period of unabashed jingoism. Now, 20 years later, this fever has long subsided, but there is a wave of wokism now. In 2042, there will be something different, but people generally react to contemporary trends.

Re: The “misinformation problem” seems like misinformation

#212

Post by standardUser »

dboreham wrote: post #69

I find it odd that nobody seems to mention the similarities between all this and religion. Widespread belief in things that can't possibly be true. Adherents can't be persuaded otherwise despite incontrovertible evidence. Sounds familiar? Perhaps it's baked into the firmware.

There have been endless comparisons of Trumpism to a cult, which at first seemed a bit extreme until we saw tens of millions of Americans believe more and more fantastical lies over the course of the last 5 years. Now, I can't imagine how we can describe it as anything other than a cult.

Re: The “misinformation problem” seems like misinformation

#213

Post by krapp »

gorwell wrote: post #150
krapp wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>To any neutral observer they are overwhelmingly peaceful and represent normal working class people. This isn't a neutral observation. "overwhelmingly peaceful and represent normal working class people" exposes a politically-motivated bias.

Does it? To a neutral observer the BLM protests were overwhelmingly peaceful and represent the administrative class. To a neutral observer the trucker protests were overwhelmingly peaceful and represent the working class.

Setting aside that no one would attempt to use the term "overwhelmingly peaceful" in a politically neutral matter nowadays unless they were completely naive (it would be like saying "think of the children" in the context of actually arguing for considering childrens' welfare) the word you omitted from the last sentence ("normal") is where the bias comes into play. "Normal" in that case carries the implication that working class people as a whole agree (or should agree) with the protestors, or that anyone who disagrees with them isn't legitimately a member of the working class.

More accurately, the protests (both of the truckers and BLM) represent more narrowly defined set of political prinicples than the beliefs of more general classes, which tend not to be as homogeneous in their views as is often portrayed.

Re: The “misinformation problem” seems like misinformation

#214

Post by epgui »

PathOfEclipse wrote: post #151
ZeroGravitas wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does "more election security" mean less black people voting? I mean the Republican party has argued in court that it should be legal for them to prevent black democrats from voting as long as it targets them as Democrat voters, rather than by race, so it's not like this is a big secret conspiracy or anything. https://www.aclu.org/other/oppose-voter-id-legislation-fact-...

Thomas Sowell has been debunking the "disparate outcome means racism" fallacy for decades. I wish more people were listening. He's the most underrated genius of his time. https://www.amazon.com/Discrimination-Disparities-Thomas-Sow... In short, if voter ID laws cause some groups of people to vote less than others, that doesn't make the law discriminatory or make the law bad. Scanning over this ACLU article, I see not…

I don't know how things work in the US, but what you describe would be legally considered "indirect discrimination" in Canada, and it would be treated exactly the same way as "direct discrimination". In fact many scholars argue that indirect discrimination can be just as problematic, if not more, than direct discrimination. [1]

[1] https://www.canlii.org/en/commentary/doc/2019CanLIIDocs1747

Re: The “misinformation problem” seems like misinformation

#215

Post by PathOfEclipse »

standardUser wrote: post #203
PathOfEclipse wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please point out one person in power who suggests selectively applying voter ID laws in a state. If this discussion weren't partisan, your concern would simply translate to: "voter ID laws make sense; let's make sure the laws are written and enforced fairly", and not, "we can't do voter ID laws because it's possible to be unfair with them!" It's possible to be unfair with every law, and every law will have disparate…

You must not follow these issues closely, because there are many examples of states picking and choosing which IDs "count", with student IDs usually not counting under many Republican-crafted laws, but other IDs, such as gun licenses, being permitted. Further examples include reducing the hours/days of the offices that issue IDs and shrinking voter registration windows. Roughly 11% of Americans don't have a valid gov…

So I googled for 2 minutes ( actually I used a different search engine because I don't trust google much for politics anymore), and I found this:

https://www.quora.com/Why-is-a-gun-license-accepted-as-a-vot...

"Your university I.D. was issued by a university compared to a government issued one. The license to carry contains your verified address, dob and all that. What does your University one have? The LTC required compete fingerprints and a background check. Seeing some differences here?"

Also:

"I cannot be 100% certain but its because Texas requires Social Security Numbers, Background checks and proof of citizenship to obtain a license to carry. So its a valid form of state issue ID. Not unlike a drivers license. Anyone could get a University ID. so long as they’re a student there. Including those on VISA’s or non-us residents."

At some point, I hope some of you all break out of your narrative bubble and start seeing that people on the other side aren't insane, racist, and power-hungry, and that we often have good reasons for what we do.

Re: The “misinformation problem” seems like misinformation

#216

Post by civilized »

mint2 wrote: post #190
civilized wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of that changes the fact that it's easier than ever to seek out contradicting points of view. People just don't want to. The algorithms feed people stuff that confirms their beliefs because that's what they like. It's all about preferences and choices, not ability.

We shouldn’t try to fix obesity, smoking, enforce seatbelts, gangs, local pollution, etc because all those are personal choices to live near or partake in?

Try to help as you wish, but describe the problem accurately. And understand that the people you are trying to help may resist you because you are interfering in their choices.

Some people passionately want to keep drugs like fentanyl out of the country. Others think it's impractical and efforts have done more harm than good. Still others say "hand them a clean needle".

Messing with the choices people make that you think are bad for them isn't easy.

Re: The “misinformation problem” seems like misinformation

#217

Post by bcrl »

aaroninsf wrote: post #174
epgui wrote: post #148

> I do not think there is much evidence that misinformation has become more widespread, that this increase in misinformation is due to technological change, or that it is at the root of the political trends liberals are most angry about. If anything, people seem to be better-informed than in the past — which is what you would expect because our information technology has gotten better [...] This kind of framing makes…

I wish I could upvote this 10x though I see atm that is not necessarily. A very nice summary of priors and predicates that need to be grokked! To these I myself often add several aspects looking more specifically what "social graph" means and what the so-called algorithm means, with lemmas about "engagement" and its industry... ...and the underbelly of how the algorithm works, the constellation of surveillance tracki…

Exactly. The fundamental difference in advertising today compared to 30 years ago is that for the entire of history until the last 2 decades, it was expensive to target individuals. Ads on TV and newspapers have to adhere to standards established by organizations like the Advertising Standards Council. Malicious ads or propaganda that target individuals with misinformation or malware or phishing can be bought on modern platforms for pennies or mere fractions of a penny. Nobody is being held to account for the damage they are doing to our society. In the past at least the cost of postage was a barrier to entry, but today? This desperately needs to be fixed.

Re: The “misinformation problem” seems like misinformation

#218

Post by PathOfEclipse »

JTrilogy wrote: post #202
PathOfEclipse wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and I'm asserting that 90+% of conservatives don't fit the mold you are casting. That was the point of my response. You can find crazies on both sides of the political aisle. One of trump's failures is that he isn't a good statesman and so failed to unite his own party, which caused a lot of failures in the legislative process as people like John McCain voted against him just because they hated him. I sincerely…

I don’t think the stats agree with you. A December 2021 poll by UMass Amherst showed only 21% of Republicans thought Biden’s election was legitimate[1] and 54% blamed the Jan6 violence on Democrats or the Capitol Police.[2] The numbers are almost the same when broken up by ideology (conservative/independant/liberal) instead of party affiliation. It’s not an issue of “crazies on both sides” — mainstream conservative v…

And the majority of young adults in 2016 thought Trump was illegitimate: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/majority-young-american...

I don't, however, take either poll seriously. Also, the word "illegitimate" can be interpreted multiple ways. One meaning is "not genuine". Many Republicans are unhappy with, among other things:

* the shameful lying and misinformation spread by corporate media outlets during election season. These organizations outright lied and just didn't care. The ends justified the means: https://www.foxnews.com/media/cnn-staffer-networks-trump-off...

* Shameful outsized influence and suppression of stories by big tech. For instance, The Hunter Biden story got completely quashed by Twitter. It turns out the story is mostly true and could have affected the election. There is significant evidence that Joe Biden was involved in corrupt deals as well. In a more just world, Biden would probably be out of office and in jail: https://news.yahoo.com/might-not-hunter-biden-shenanigans-08....

* Corrupt influence by wealthy democrats like Mark Zuckerburg, who spent millions to potentially influence the outcome of the election: https://bbc-edition.com/entertainment/the-2020-election-wasn...

* States like Pennsylvania and Wisconsin breaking their own laws at election time.

They are plenty of ways to justify using the word "illegitimate" without claiming anything overtly illegal was done to successfully change the results of the election.

It’s not an issue of “crazies on both sides” — mainstream conservative views of recent events are detached from reality. There’s a pipeline of misinformation that starts with white nationalists, runs through InfoWars and their ilk, and eventually leads to OANN and Fox News

I don't follow Fox News or Infowars, but I know of numerous examples of lies and misinformation coming from NYT, WaPo, CNN, NBC, NPR, and so on. Maybe both sides peddle in misinformation. Maybe one side peddles in it a lot more than the other. I'm going to need to see more than this UMass poll to convince me that it's the republican side that's the bigger problem.

Re: The “misinformation problem” seems like misinformation

#219

Post by nickff »

JTrilogy wrote: post #202
PathOfEclipse wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and I'm asserting that 90+% of conservatives don't fit the mold you are casting. That was the point of my response. You can find crazies on both sides of the political aisle. One of trump's failures is that he isn't a good statesman and so failed to unite his own party, which caused a lot of failures in the legislative process as people like John McCain voted against him just because they hated him. I sincerely…

I don’t think the stats agree with you. A December 2021 poll by UMass Amherst showed only 21% of Republicans thought Biden’s election was legitimate[1] and 54% blamed the Jan6 violence on Democrats or the Capitol Police.[2] The numbers are almost the same when broken up by ideology (conservative/independant/liberal) instead of party affiliation. It’s not an issue of “crazies on both sides” — mainstream conservative v…

Hillary Clinton thought Donald Trump's election was "illegitimate", does that mean she's a "crazy"? What is a "legitimate" election anyway? Does it require a certain level of participation, imply a certain bound on fraudulent voting, limits on intimidation, or perhaps propaganda, or maybe it just means that the winner of the popular vote carried the day?

If you ask a vague question, the answer isn't meaningful.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-trum...

Re: The “misinformation problem” seems like misinformation

#220

Post by bcrl »

fortuna86 wrote: post #166
epgui wrote: post #148

> I do not think there is much evidence that misinformation has become more widespread, that this increase in misinformation is due to technological change, or that it is at the root of the political trends liberals are most angry about. If anything, people seem to be better-informed than in the past — which is what you would expect because our information technology has gotten better [...] This kind of framing makes…

> If anything, people seem to be better-informed than in the past [citation needed] more information =/ better informed, the same way drinking from a firehose doesn't allow you to ingest more water than drinking slowly from a glass. This point missed ironically by a website called "slowboring.com"

I would suggest that a slightly better firehose analogy is that you're drinking from a firehose that includes multiple streams of good drinking water, urine and poison all combined together. When you drink from that firehose, what do you think the odds are that you'll just get the drinking water part of the stream?
Post reply on HN