this post was submitted on 07 Feb 2024
288 points (95.6% liked)

Technology

59589 readers
2891 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] General_Effort@lemmy.world 28 points 9 months ago (18 children)

There are certainly purposes for which one wants as much of the raw sensor readings as possible. Other than science, evidence for legal proceedings is the only thing that comes to mind, though.

I'm more disturbed by the naive views so many people have of photographic evidence. Can you think of any historical photograph that proves anything?

Really famous in the US: The marines raising the flag over Iwo Jima. It was staged for the cameras, of course. What does it prove?

A more momentous occasion is illustrated by a photograph of Red Army soldiers raising the soviet flag over the Reichstag. The rubble of Berlin in the background gives it more evidentiary value, but it is manipulated. It was not only staged but actually doctored. Smoke was added in the background and an extra watch on a soldier's arm (evidence of robbery) removed.

Closer to now: As you are aware, anti-American operatives are trying to destroy the constitutional order of the republic. After the last election, they claimed to have video evidence of fraud during ballot counting. On one short snippet of video, one sees a woman talking to some people and then, after they leave, pull a box out from under a table. It's quite inconspicuous, but these bad actors invented a story around this video snippet, in which a "suitcase" full of fraudulent ballots is taken out of hiding after observers leave.

As psychologists know, people do not think in strictly rational terms. We do not take in facts and draw logical conclusion. Professional manipulators, such as advertisers, know that we tend to think in "narratives". If a story is compelling, we like to twist neutral snippets of fact into evidence. We see what we believe.

[–] pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.cafe 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)
[–] General_Effort@lemmy.world -2 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Seriously? At least clarify that you mean film and not photographs. The effects of lower gravity and not atmosphere take at least some effort to get right. Photos can be staged anywhere.

Have you ever looked at the arguments of moon hoaxers? A lot of them would be good questions, if they were questions. Why can't you see the stars? Why are there multiple shadows if the sun is supposed to be the only light source? The boot prints are so perfect, as prints only are in wet sand. How can the flag wave without an atmosphere?

You can easily find answers (and more questions). How do you "prove" these answers? How do you go from that to actually turning photos, and even film, into proof positive of the moon landing?

[–] pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.cafe 6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

Oh my god, this IS just a launchpad for lame conspiracybros 🤦🤦🤦

No, the Moon landings were real and the images/clips you see of it online are real too. If it was faked, the USSR would have screamed to the high heavens about it. Just because you personally haven't experienced something does not mean it can't actually happen.

Grow the fuck up and accept reality doesn't conform to your wishful thinking.

Oh, and the Earth is round, too, and NASA livestreams and photos of the very clearly round Earth are valid too.

Just because the majority of people believe something without thinking about it doesn't mean it isn't true or they're not critical thinkers. People know what's worthwhile to question and what's not, and that's a vital aspect of critical thinking you did not consider because you don't understand or care about what it is, it's just an emotional cudgel for you to accuse regular people of bullshit to brainwash and abuse them.

Get off of my feed. Go outside.


Inb4 "Well that's not his point" -- yes it is; he's just trying to pretend to be reasonable to get his foot in the door. Salesmen do this shit all the time; it's a common tactic and it's why we know not to listen to people like him.

[–] prole@sh.itjust.works 1 points 9 months ago

Inb4 "Well that's not his point" -- yes it is; he's just trying to pretend to be reasonable to get his foot in the door.

Maybe it's just this particular instance, but lately my Lemmy feed has been full of comments doing exactly this. To the point where it's ruining my experience. Which seems to be the goal.

[–] General_Effort@lemmy.world -1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Well, that's one straightforward, though rather disturbing, demonstration of what I was talking about. You perceived some snippets of fact and constructed a story around it.

There's no rational way you can deduce any parts of that story from my posts here. There is nothing that suggests any hidden motives on my part. Occam's razor would say that you should simply accept my stated motive, as it is a sufficient explanation.

A more linear rational view would find problems with your story. You brought up the moon landing and I responded. This contradicts the idea that I have any particular interest in moon hoax ideas.

A taxonomy of fallacies might identify this as an ad hominem attack or character assassination. You made up lies about me, instead of replying to my arguments. I note that you do not use photos or film to argue for the reality of the moon landings, but refer to the reaction of the Soviet Union. That is something worth thinking about some more. While it is still a narrative, we do glimpse a rational argument.

So, thanks for the example. The way you just conjure a paranoid fantasy tale, instead of engaging rationally, is a very topical demonstration of conspiracy thinking.

[–] prole@sh.itjust.works -2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Just stop. Stop trying to repackage stupid, boring conspiracy bullshit by couching it in faux-philosophy and five dollar words.

Nobody with more than an 8th grade education is falling for the "This sounds smart and I see big words, therefore the person who wrote it must be smarter than me and know what they're talking about" bit.

[–] General_Effort@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Can I ask why you feel the need to insult me?

[–] prole@sh.itjust.works 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)
[–] General_Effort@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

Ok, if you feel that way. Can you express why you felt that the content of your replies was reasonable?

[–] prole@sh.itjust.works 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Really didn't take long for this site (maybe just this instance?) to turn into another reddit. A cesspool of astroturfing and proud ignorance. Either a complete inability to think critically, or just brain rot, in this case.

It seems like there are just certain people who are dead set on ruining any space on the internet that still exists for people without brain rot. Like they know they're lowering the overall quality of discussion, and instead of doing better, they lean into it. If they can't enjoy themselves, then nobody can.

Just one more extension of their childish, petulant demeanor. It's exactly why over 70 million people voted for a traitorous, demented man child; they see themselves in him.

load more comments (16 replies)