Remix clone Hacker News

The issue isn't about "screen vs. print", the issue is about "critical, discerning, questioning mind" vs. "mindless consumerism".

The epistemological collapse we are experiencing wasn't caused by information being online and disseminated via browsers.

It was, and is, caused by a mass of uninformed people, with strong tribal behavior, shutting out any information that doesn't fit their preconceived world views, and industries and politics designed to benefit from that behavior.

And btw. misinformation can be, and has been, spread via print [even today][1].

[1]: https://english.nv.ua/nation/russia-delivers-nine-tons-of-pr...

▲

everdrive 11 hours ago | parent [-]

I think it's much more fundamental than this; the new speed and new methods with which information can be spread are themselves the problem. Misinformation is downstream of this. The more fundamental problem seems to be tribalism, which sort of information can be spread quickly, (anything with strong emotional content, outrage, etc.) and the uncomfortable fact that most people acquire knowledge through social transfer than through actual understanding. (eg: do most people really understand the geometry or science to prove the earth is round? Or, do they know the earth is round because this is what they've been taught. I'll bet most of HN does understand this, but most people could no produce this if asked without any sort of preparation.)

The new methods of spreading information are the problem, and it's unclear just exactly how we're all going to adjust.

	▲	lordnacho 10 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		> the uncomfortable fact that most people acquire knowledge through social transfer than through actual understanding This hits the nail on the head. In the end, I am trusting other people to do the experiments and reporting the findings. I can regurgitate a lot of stuff about science, but in the end I believe it because I grew on the scientist side of the fence. If you look at conspiracy theories, the thing they always do is come up with a reason not to believe in the established authorities.
	▲	anal_reactor 7 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		> eg: do most people really understand the geometry or science to prove the earth is round? During the "there are flat-earthers" fad I realized that for the majority of people it doesn't matter whether it's flat or not, the question whether it's flat or round actually only arises when they need to perform an action which depends on the Earth's shape, which is never, because most people are not pilots, not astronauts, etc., so for them, the model of Earth being flat works perfectly well. It's the same as people saying that Earth is round for most intents and purposes, and then a smart-ass saying "actually, it's not a perfectly round ball". Yes, it's not a perfectly round ball, but we're discussing time zones here, not local weather patterns. Most people say that Earth is round not because they believe it's the correct model for their use case, but because they want to belong to the club of people perceived as smart, and that's the view expected of a "smart" person. The flat-earthers perfectly uncovered this charade, by showing that most people just parrot "Earth is round" because that's the social consensus which just so happens to be true.