| ▲ | cultofmetatron 2 hours ago |
| > What a callous view of people. Who's your benchmark? TikTok addicted kids? brother, we are all walking around with a supercomputer in our pocket thats capable of accessing the sum total of human knowledge and yet we're still stuck with people who think the earth is flat. |
|
| ▲ | thunky an hour ago | parent | next [-] |
| > brother, Why am seeing "brother" a lot recently? |
| |
|
| ▲ | graemep 21 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > yet we're still stuck with people who think the earth is flat. Very few. They are louder online. I have never met one in real life. Yes, the internet does spread misinformation, but I think its pessimistic to think it outweighs the benefits. A lot of the problems are economic and social at the core too. |
| |
| ▲ | librasteve 5 minutes ago | parent [-] | | but, the earth is flatter than it looks … since, according to GR, spacetime is convex around it gravity well |
|
|
| ▲ | mcculley an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > capable of accessing the sum total of human knowledge No. Lots of knowledge is still behind paywalls or not yet digitized. Some models have been trained on books that we cannot search or download. |
| |
| ▲ | alnwlsn a few seconds ago | parent [-] | | Plenty has already been lost due to being buried in search, removed for lack of interest, or simplified so far as to be too generalized. |
|
|
| ▲ | yladiz an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Access to knowledge doesn’t mean you automatically acquire that knowledge. |
| |
| ▲ | koolba an hour ago | parent [-] | | Sadly access to knowledge strongly correlates with access to mindless entertainment that competes with the absorption of said knowledge. If you grow up in a house in the woods with every math book known to man, but nothing else, you will eventually read them. But if that house also has every comic book, porno mag, animal bloopers, etc, you’ll never pick one up. | | |
| ▲ | yladiz 16 minutes ago | parent [-] | | This doesn’t make any sense. We have more access to entertainment, be it comics, porn, or films, than any period in history, yet we continue to make more substantial scientific progress than any point in history. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | skywhopper an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I think you have the causation backwards: we have people thinking the world is flat because they can access the sum total of human knowledge, both true and false. There’s so much available, with similar production values, that going down brainwashing rabbit holes like flat earth, anti-vax, and more is a lot easier than it has ever been before. |
| |
| ▲ | iamnothere an hour ago | parent [-] | | Let’s be real, some people are going to believe absurd things even if you strap them in a chair Clockwork Orange style and force them to consume your favorite propaganda 24/7. There is no way to “align” human brains to your preferences. The Soviets tried it, the Chinese tried it, the Americans tried it. Nobody succeeded. The best you can do is attempt to sway the masses, but you’d better rely on positive messaging, because mass culture’s failure modes are even scarier than small subcultures. Attempting to stamp out competing worldviews leads a certain kind of (relatively common) person to dig even harder for forbidden knowledge. If you’re not careful this will lead people directly to the arms of your geopolitical enemies, as it’s not possible to fully stamp out their narratives—they have a big budget! |
|
|
| ▲ | wiseowise 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > brother, we are all walking around with a supercomputer in our pocket thats capable of accessing the sum total of human knowledge and yet we're still stuck with people who think the earth is flat. And even more people believe there's an old man on a cloud judging everyone, so what? |
| |
| ▲ | graemep 20 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | That is a strawman. Who believes in an old man on a cloud judging everyone? Far fewer people believe anything like that than believe. Even online I have never come across anyone whose beliefs could be reasonably characterised that way. | |
| ▲ | Forgeties79 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I’m not religious but there’s a significant difference here. Burden of proof is on the person making the assertion in both cases, but we can’t prove without a doubt that god doesn’t exist even if we don’t feel there’s enough evidence to suggest he is. There is, however, concrete evidence the earth isn’t flat, so no matter who the burden is on it’s demonstrably false. Put another way: You can concretely observe without a doubt that not only is the earth not flat, but also that it can’t be flat. We can’t confidently say god can’t exist. | | |
| ▲ | graemep 18 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | and most people who believe in God will cite some evidence - religious experiences, or philosophical proofs or whatever. Whether you accept that evidence is sufficient or not, it is in an entirely different class. | | |
| ▲ | Forgeties79 8 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Sure but I’m just not even opening that can of worms. I’m just focusing on the very clear cut difference here |
| |
| ▲ | technothrasher an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | I don't think you've thought through what you're trying to assert. A god could make you believe anything they wanted to about the earth. So if you cannot disprove a god, then you cannot disprove the theory that the earth is flat. | | |
| ▲ | virgilp 15 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | You can still believe that the scientific method works; and might leads you to 2 conclusions: (a) "I can prove earth is not flat" (using this methodology)
(b) I cannot prove there is no God, though I may believe the prevalence of evidence does not support the hypothesis, there's no scientific test that I can design. | |
| ▲ | detourdog an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I’m not sure you thought this through. Why would G-d want to or care to make one have thoughts. | |
| ▲ | Forgeties79 7 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | Just because you think I am wrong does not mean I have failed to think through the various components/implications of my statement. I can disprove that the Earth is flat with the incredibly varied, concrete, observable evidence that it is not. It comes in many forms and is undeniable, hence the lengths flat earthers have to go to to “prove” the evidence is all just a collection of lies that serve some nebulous, nefarious purpose (they don’t even agree on what that is) that serves some faceless evil group they prop up (usually “the deep state” or Jewish people). On the other hand, I do not have concrete, observable evidence that God does not exist. That’s the thrust of my point. |
|
| |
| ▲ | an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
|
|
| ▲ | coldtea 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| >and yet we're still stuck with people who think the earth is flat. I'd take those over the people who want to shove AI down our throats any day of the week! |
|
| ▲ | baal80spam 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| This hurts. |