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

NYT and vaping: How to lie by saying only true things (2022)

gwern.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 87 posts

Re: NYT and vaping: How to lie by saying only true things (2022)

#71

Post by The_President »

beloch wrote: post #20

Ironically, this article is guilty of the same thing it rails against. No evidence is provided for the safety of THC vaping products. An NYT article that was clearly biased against THC was picked apart instead. The clear implication is that THC vapes were unjustly targeted and readers should assume the contrary of the dishonest NYT article. i.e. That THC vapes are safe. Yet, no direct evidence of that is provided. A…

In the economy pen market, it's anyone's guess to what part of the plant (shake/trim/flower) was used for the process and if it was flushed correctly. Those labels that show the growth additives and nutrients get pretty lengthy.

Re: NYT and vaping: How to lie by saying only true things (2022)

#72

Post by pseudohadamard »

beloch wrote: post #20

Ironically, this article is guilty of the same thing it rails against. No evidence is provided for the safety of THC vaping products. An NYT article that was clearly biased against THC was picked apart instead. The clear implication is that THC vapes were unjustly targeted and readers should assume the contrary of the dishonest NYT article. i.e. That THC vapes are safe. Yet, no direct evidence of that is provided. A…

My response was slightly different: Take any article, any writeup, on any topic, and go through it in fine enough detail and you can nitpick it to pieces. This was just someone engaging in their hobby. I stopped reading after a paragraph or two.

Re: NYT and vaping: How to lie by saying only true things (2022)

#73

Post by DANmode »

bonsai_spool wrote: post #53
pram wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The NYT (and Judith Miller) was one of the most shameless shills of the Iraq War, laundering complete bullshit and lies. It’s not completely bad, there have been outstanding individuals, and the election coverage is still the best imo, but there is no reason to believe the organization has higher integrity than the rest of the MSM.

> The NYT (and Judith Miller) was one of the most shameless shills of the Iraq War, laundering complete bullshit and lies. It’s not completely bad, there have been outstanding individuals, and the election coverage is still the best imo, but there is no reason to believe the organization has higher integrity than the rest of the MSM. Very respectfully, as pre-teen at the time, I recognized that there was no real reas…

> based on my then daily reading of NYT

and if you’d only read the first headlines on the frontpage during that time?

or…less?

Like the majority of voters?

Re: NYT and vaping: How to lie by saying only true things (2022)

#74

Post by kart23 »

I don’t know if the authors framing that the comments got duped is exactly right. I think most of the comments are upset that kids are addicted to vaping nicotine which is definitely true.

also, the first reader comment literally says:

“Vaping hasn’t been shown to be unsafe scientifically“

Re: NYT and vaping: How to lie by saying only true things (2022)

#75

Post by adjejmxbdjdn »

bityard wrote: post #31
beloch wrote: post #20

Ironically, this article is guilty of the same thing it rails against. No evidence is provided for the safety of THC vaping products. An NYT article that was clearly biased against THC was picked apart instead. The clear implication is that THC vapes were unjustly targeted and readers should assume the contrary of the dishonest NYT article. i.e. That THC vapes are safe. Yet, no direct evidence of that is provided. A…

You read the gwern article very incorrectly. It was pointing out that Lizzie's injuries were caused by _adulterated_ illegal THC vapes. While the NYT article was using weasel writing techniques to mislead readers into the conclusion the that legal flavored nicotine vapes are dangerous.

The OP may have read the article incorrectly but it engages in the same lying by saying the truth that the NYT article it claims engaged in because many people would read it that way.

Unlike the author I’m not claiming that they did it deliberately, but that’s what their article ends up doing.

Re: NYT and vaping: How to lie by saying only true things (2022)

#76

Post by jjk166 »

beloch wrote: post #20

Ironically, this article is guilty of the same thing it rails against. No evidence is provided for the safety of THC vaping products. An NYT article that was clearly biased against THC was picked apart instead. The clear implication is that THC vapes were unjustly targeted and readers should assume the contrary of the dishonest NYT article. i.e. That THC vapes are safe. Yet, no direct evidence of that is provided. A…

You don't need to prove the opposite of someone's claim to argue their evidence fails to demonstrate their claim is true.

Re: NYT and vaping: How to lie by saying only true things (2022)

#77

Post by bonsai_spool »

DANmode wrote: post #73
bonsai_spool wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The NYT (and Judith Miller) was one of the most shameless shills of the Iraq War, laundering complete bullshit and lies. It’s not completely bad, there have been outstanding individuals, and the election coverage is still the best imo, but there is no reason to believe the organization has higher integrity than the rest of the MSM. Very respectfully, as pre-teen at the time, I recognized that there was no real reas…

> based on my then daily reading of NYT and if you’d only read the first headlines on the frontpage during that time? or…less? Like the majority of voters?

> Like the majority of voters?

I wasn't voting as a 12 year-old!

> and if you’d only read the first headlines on the frontpage during that time?

But I was reading the entirety of the articles :-)

Re: NYT and vaping: How to lie by saying only true things (2022)

#78

Post by DANmode »

bonsai_spool wrote: post #77
DANmode wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> based on my then daily reading of NYT and if you’d only read the first headlines on the frontpage during that time? or…less? Like the majority of voters?

> Like the majority of voters? I wasn't voting as a 12 year-old! > and if you’d only read the first headlines on the frontpage during that time? But I was reading the entirety of the articles :-)

But nobody else was, unfortunately.

My point was: that’s how they get away with manufactured consent.

Technically they reported on every nuance: but on page G8 lol

Re: NYT and vaping: How to lie by saying only true things (2022)

#79

Post by lovich »

Scroll_Swe wrote: post #61

[flagged]

Oh, ok. I checked this guys account after he got aggressive with me. This is another Yay for how cheap clawd bots are and how frequently they are used to divide society.

In the rare event that you are not actually a bot, then I sincerely hope you have a long and painful disease leading to an end of life.

Re: NYT and vaping: How to lie by saying only true things (2022)

#80

Post by Scroll_Swe »

lovich wrote: post #79
Scroll_Swe wrote: post #61

[flagged]

Oh, ok. I checked this guys account after he got aggressive with me. This is another Yay for how cheap clawd bots are and how frequently they are used to divide society. In the rare event that you are not actually a bot, then I sincerely hope you have a long and painful disease leading to an end of life.

Not a bot, just a new account. If you want the site to freeze account creation take that up with the mods.

The irony of wishing someone a painful death because you suspect them of "spreading division" is lost on you. My opinions come from research and personal experience, that's called having a perspective, not being a bot.

You're doing the classic Reddit move: when you can't argue the point, call it a troll account. I'm a real white Swedish person saddened by the death of my country on a real PC. Happy to verify, Discord, photo, whatever. But I suspect you're not actually interested in that.

Post reply on HN