Live data from Hacker News

Is Stupidity Expanding? Some Hypotheses

greaterwrong.com

251–260 of 307 posts

Re: Is Stupidity Expanding? Some Hypotheses

#251

I've engaged a few flat earthers to actually listen to their arguments and show them my own evidence that it's real (locating amateur radio satellites using data shared by people around the globe and demonstrating the doppler effect on them). The response strikes me as being indicative of mental illness. And I don't mean that as an insult - I mean that when confronted with that they're clearly irrational. And somethi…

I think there is too much information around for the average person to filter and process and digest. All three are important parts of living in a society and it looks to me like even with e.g. economic issues alone, it's just very hard for (to be fair) anybody to keep up. In turn, people reach out to conspiracy theories to simplify the world around them with obvious answers and explanations. My theory, sort of.

I don't think there is too much information. There are plenty of very busy people with very good grasps on the world. I think it's more that people don't give time to information, and prefer entertainment. People in the U.S. spend on average 4 hours a day watching TV, not reading newspapers.

Re: Is Stupidity Expanding? Some Hypotheses

#252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"...people will similarly jump in to correct the wrong belief." This works really well when you have a question about something. If you post a question asking for answers or ideas you often get crickets. But if you post an idea that is clearly wrong you usually get lots of people jumping in to correct you.

That's called Cunningham's Law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ward_Cunningham

+1. I have heard this idea a number of times and seen it in action but did not know that there was actually a "law" and a person credited with stating it.

Re: Is Stupidity Expanding? Some Hypotheses

#253
post #181
post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When you put those kind of people in isolation and a high stress situation you get those kinds of behaviors. The Puritans were by no means the only people of that time who had mainstream beliefs that we now consider delusional. You'd be hard pressed to find any significant body of people of that time who didn't. > For example, climate change denial. I would also say, climate change alarmism. Which, if you are incli…

> The Puritans were by no means the only people of that time who had mainstream beliefs that we now consider delusional. You'd be hard pressed to find any significant body of people of that time who didn't. We will be mocked for sure in 300 years but OTOH witch hunts maybe weren't as mainstream all over Europe as you might think. For example, in Europe between 1450 and 1750 35,000 witches were executed. Of those, onl…

> witch hunts maybe weren't as mainstream all over Europe as you might think

I didn't say they were. I didn't say all societies of that time had the same wrong mainstream beliefs as the Puritans. I just said they all had some wrong mainstream beliefs.

> the situation is certainly dire. I don't think it's far fetched to think that if we continue in business as usual, modern industrial civilization could be at risk.

I disagree (to be clear, I disagree about the "civilization could be at risk" part, I'm not saying I'm in favor of just continuing business as usual--I think there are certainly things we could and should do better). But I don't want to hijack the discussion into a debate about climate change and what we should do about it. My only point here is that there is significant disagreement on this point, and the various sides (there are more than two) can't all be right since they hold beliefs that are inconsistent with each other, so clearly some widely held belief in this area is wrong, we just have no consensus on which belief it is, so society as a whole can't make a correction.

Re: Is Stupidity Expanding? Some Hypotheses

#254

Counterintuitively, people love reading about and engaging in what they consider "stupidity". Internet companies capitalize on this by bringing an optimized stream of stupidity for your viewing pleasure. Take a look at the front page of Reddit (logged out, default subs): Half of the content highlights stupidity of others: /r/IdiotsInCars shows the worst drivers from around the world, /r/insanepeoplefacebook shows the…

I am convinced the world is "stupid", but it's not because I passively browse the front page of reddit more than I should. In fact, before you pointed out that it's mostly a stupidity concentrator (nice term btw), I didn't even notice that. When I read the front page of reddit I don't deduce the average intelligence of the participants by the most popular (mostly negative) posts of the day, I'm banking on the most up…

In every country I've been to I've seen the same levels of stupid. It's comforting to know that people aren't so different from each other.

But I think that what you are attributing to stupidity would be better attributed to culture, size, or strength of authority -- the countries that have handled the pandemic well score favorably in one of those attributes. Here in the 'states we are strongly individualistic and historically distrustful of government, and bad actors have been stoking those flames for a while so we are in a particuarly vulnerable state right now.

Now, in my opinion, stupidity is humanity's seeming refusal to not act more switfly about climate change, but I'm sure someone else would argue that's attributable to some other, er, attribute

Re: Is Stupidity Expanding? Some Hypotheses

#255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is one thing that frustrates me on discussion boards. You have no idea who is behind the nickname. Is this an adult with a college degree, corporate job, kids, mortgage, etc.? Or is this a 12 year old masquerading as someone older? Sometimes people argue against things that seem so obvious as an adult that I really really want to know who is on the other side.

This is perhaps why we see spelling and grammar called out so often on the internet. We're trying to lift the veil the fiber cables put in front of our eyes and reveal the idiot on the other end, but there's not much to go off of and we cling to whatever evidence we can.

The whole notion of spending time sharing thoughts to random strangers on the internet seems pretty silly on the surface. With introspection, however, it becomes apparent that the return on investment, so to speak, is that it provides a platform to challenge your understanding of the world.

It is easy to fall into misunderstood or outdated ideas. Sharing those ideas with others prompts them to correct any errors in thought as a service to you. In turn, they will receive similar corrections for their misunderstood and outdated ideas as they share them. Collectively, this improves the shared understanding of everyone. The foundation of education.

Spelling and grammar corrections come part and parcel in that. They are given because they equally want to be received. There is really no greater feeling than being able to learn something new, and realizing that you were spelling something wrong, to be able to spell it correctly in the future, fulfills that as much as realizing your understanding of some complex subject was off.

On that note, those of us involved in the software industry know that software testing is greatly benefitted from testing invalid inputs as much as valid inputs. When challenging your ideas, it can be equally useful to try and take an alternative perspective – invalid input, if you will – and see what kind of correction data is returned. If the correction data is poor, what was seemingly incorrect input may be closer to being correct than you originally thought. This can be just as useful in correcting your understanding as simply posting what you hold as being true.

The old adage about asking "How do I do X in Linux?" will yield no response, but stating that "Linux sucks! It cannot do X." will solve your problem nicely captures what online message boards serve. To try and apply a human element to who sits behind the "Linux sucks" statement misses the point.

Re: Is Stupidity Expanding? Some Hypotheses

#257

I m entertaining the idea that it is indeed expanding. Well not expanding , but that intelligence is regressing to the mean which is equally bad. People thrive under constraints and struggle. It's what makes games fun to play. Maybe the ease of modern life makes humans complacent. I mean i can't explain why i see so many people struggle when they use an old computer program which used to be commonplace in its day/ ob…

> Where are the kolmogorovs, the von neumanns, ...

Communicating via conference and paper, not via popular media. (As DEK says, their task is to get to the bottom of things, not keep on top of them.) IOW, where they've always been.

The Glass Bead Game (1943) calls the twentieth century the Age of the Feuilleton as snark on that genre (the dead tree equivalent of blogging) as expression of idiocracy.

Re: Is Stupidity Expanding? Some Hypotheses

#258

Counterintuitively, people love reading about and engaging in what they consider "stupidity". Internet companies capitalize on this by bringing an optimized stream of stupidity for your viewing pleasure. Take a look at the front page of Reddit (logged out, default subs): Half of the content highlights stupidity of others: /r/IdiotsInCars shows the worst drivers from around the world, /r/insanepeoplefacebook shows the…

There is a word for this: schadenfreude.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schadenfreude

Re: Is Stupidity Expanding? Some Hypotheses

#259

Counterintuitively, people love reading about and engaging in what they consider "stupidity". Internet companies capitalize on this by bringing an optimized stream of stupidity for your viewing pleasure. Take a look at the front page of Reddit (logged out, default subs): Half of the content highlights stupidity of others: /r/IdiotsInCars shows the worst drivers from around the world, /r/insanepeoplefacebook shows the…

I think you've made a sound point with good examples. The parts that do worry me are things where you wouldn't expect that to happen. For instance, in this post¹, you will see where many people have interacted with the comments. This is just the /r/bayarea subreddit so doesn't specifically select for 'stupidity'.

Now, set aside the actual proposition and read the comments. Most of them are trivially wrong about:

* What a California Ballot Proposition is

* What the role of the legislator is wrt ballot props

* The text of the proposition

Now, this would be a problem if the text was particularly hard, but it really isn't. Someone in the comments there pointed out that this was the same as the infamous Prop J and K pair where one raised taxes to provide funding for a thing and the other provided the thing but only if the funding was there. The funding failed, the thing passed. The thing never came to exist. Afterwards, on Reddit, I read commenters describing how they didn't know the two things were linked.

This is a pretty common pattern on forums like this. Even HN suffers from it where people avoid primary sources only to intentionally play telephone and get bad information which they then convincingly repeat. I've definitely seen folks confidently bullshit something they just learned from another comment instead of reading the primary source. As an amusing coincidence, one of these was about the ridesharing min wage law that Seattle passed. The primary source was very clear, but most comments argued about a thing that wasn't a failure mode of the actual law - but was a failure mode of a non-existent law that they had manufactured from thin air.

¹ https://www.reddit.com/r/bayarea/comments/j6c4lv/im_a_softwa... it's deleted now but the same text as https://techcrunch.com/2020/10/06/im-a-software-engineer-at-...

Re: Is Stupidity Expanding? Some Hypotheses

#260

I've engaged a few flat earthers to actually listen to their arguments and show them my own evidence that it's real (locating amateur radio satellites using data shared by people around the globe and demonstrating the doppler effect on them). The response strikes me as being indicative of mental illness. And I don't mean that as an insult - I mean that when confronted with that they're clearly irrational. And somethi…

I think it's a failure of leadership. I believe that stupidity is and has always been widespread and in normal times the more intelligent ideas have the widest subscription, even among the stupid. But when leaders fail to [be open, be objective, act in good faith, stick to the truth], then even the stupid can detect that they are being played and they rebel and seek alternative facts. So my theory is that leaders are…

> leaders are currently gaming the populous rather than leading them, and that this is so obvious to everybody that trust in leadership and institutions has gone out the window

I agree with that assessment. My limited and probably wrong interpretation of history indicates that in general, behavior will now tend towards revolutionary.

Post reply on HN