Media New media and anti-intellectualism

[Foreigner]

Information has become democratized and on the whole I think that's a good thing, even if it generates content that one believes is counterfactual. On the one hand people can double down on ignorance, but on the other the people who are interested in genuine learning can sharply accelerate in this environment at low cost, without having to shell out huge amounts of money to institutional programs. It has made education available to the entire world. The benefits far outweigh the costs.

IMO what social media has actually done is gotten people to uselessly argue, to be reflextively contradictory as a recreational past time. That's because most content is based on short attention spans, which is not conducive to developing critical knowledge. It's annoying AF, but you can always change the channel and listen to someone who you believe is more credible.

 

[4DQSAR]

I note that Mike Godwin made it clear that his 'law' in no way prevents people from comparing Donald Trump and Hitler.

I have no idea what MGs politics are, but why feel constrained when others are USING that constraint against you?

 

[someguyontheinternet]

No. I mean people with common sense and intuition. People that uderstand the differences between culture and race

I like that y'all have invented a new way to be racist, good creativity but not enough still obvious

 

[someguyontheinternet]

Information has become democratized and on the whole I think that's a good thing, even if it generates content that one believes is counterfactual. On the one hand people can double down on ignorance, but on the other the people who are interested in genuine learning can sharply accelerate in this environment at low cost, without having to shell out huge amounts of money to institutional programs. It has made education available to the entire world. The benefits far outweigh the costs.

IMO what social media has actually done is gotten people to uselessly argue, to be reflextively contradictory as a recreational past time. That's because most content is based on short attention spans, which is not conducive to developing critical knowledge. It's annoying AF, but you can always change the channel and listen to someone who you believe is more credible.

the problem is that not everybody is going to change the channel

 

[Electrum1]

I like that y'all have invented a new way to be racist, good creativity but not enough still obvious

So you don't understand the differences between cultures and races then. I bet when you hear "immigrants" you think "brown"

 

[Electrum1]

the problem is that not everybody is going to change the channel

Why is that a problem. A problem for who?

 

[Electrum1]

Seems like it's only a problem for those who want to control and dictate the information and entertainment that others can consume

 

[someguyontheinternet]

Why is that a problem. A problem for who?

for humanity, why should we consider the spread of lies and misinformation to be good? that is objectively bad for humanity

how do you think Germans came to hate Jews in the 1930s

 

[Kellsee]

Its harder to get people to accept the truth then it is to get them to believe a lie.

People are willing to swallow too much second handed skepticism just for the sake of convenience

Learn the correct ways to validate your sources

 

[Foreigner]

the problem is that not everybody is going to change the channel

That's true... but I think the aggregate of the benefits from democratized knowledge will eventually overcome those limitations, especially if humanity challenges the draconian algorithms used to entrap their minds in certain content. Plus... not everyone who starts ignorant stays that way. I have faith that people can change -- eventually.

We have had social media for about 20 years or so, and it only really kicked off for part of that.

A lot of people are having social media fatigue now, especially with AI showing up. I would not be surprised if people unplug or move on to better systems in the coming decades.

 

[Electrum1]

for humanity, why should we consider the spread of lies and misinformation to be good? that is objectively bad for humanity

how do you think Germans came to hate Jews in the 1930s

I didn't say it was "good" and you know that. A free market of information is better than what you seem to want

Then you even bring up Nazis and Jews without even seeing that what you seem to want aligns with the Nazis

 

[4DQSAR]

I've read Russia sees the most effective way to defeat the US is a 'Colour Revolution' although nobody quite agrees what the term means in the 21st century.

 

[someguyontheinternet]

I didn't say it was "good" and you know that. A free market of information is better than what you seem to want

Then you even bring up Nazis and Jews without even seeing that what you seem to want aligns with the Nazis

have I presented some sort of solution? I must have missed when I posted it perhaps you could fill me in

 

[Electrum1]

Yeah you obviously want to censor people like Tim Pool. That is clear

 

[someguyontheinternet]

Yeah you obviously want to censor people like Tim Pool. That is clear

when did I say anything like that?

 

[Electrum1]

when did I say anything like that?

Then what's your problem with people watching Tim Pool?

 

[someguyontheinternet]

Then what's your problem with people watching Tim Pool?

I think you need to go back to the beginning and reread the thread

 

[Electrum1]

You said it's a problem that everyone isn't going to change the channel. So people watching him is a problem to you. Clearly you want to fix that problem

 

[someguyontheinternet]

You said it's a problem that everyone isn't going to change the channel. So people watching him is a problem to you. Clearly you want to fix that problem

I think we should prosecute Russian propaganda operations like Tim Pool. or should foreign state actors be able to hire whoever they want in the US to spin propaganda?

 

[Electrum1]

You clearly are trying to obfuscate your actual intentions