On managing outrage in Silicon Valley

Re:On managing outrage in Silicon Valley by bbctol on Monday August 07, 2017 @02:19PM (#14949822)

Because you were on Twitter? The most annoying thing about this back-and-forth ping-ponging of increasing outrage is that everyone, on both sides, only reacts to the silliest arguments. Sturgeon's Law holds up pretty well for hot takes, and the majority of anything written on an issue is likely to be bad. If most of the responses you read struck you as irrational, that's a function of the infrastructure that sends you information more than the quality of either side.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:On managing outrage in Silicon Valley by EddieRingle on Monday August 07, 2017 @02:41PM (#14950050)

There were quite a few Medium posts as well. But no, I completely agree with you. I've discussed with others recently about how I'd love to have a tool or place where I can search for a given assertion and see the (scientific) evidence for and against it, as well as related assertions and opposing assertions.

And I'm not just talking about being able to "Google it". If I use Google or a general search engine then I have to wade through who knows how many links of ambiguous quality and/or bias.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:On managing outrage in Silicon Valley by CodeCube on Monday August 07, 2017 @05:25PM (#14951394)

If such a repository existed ... it would simply be dismissed as biased by whatever side of the argument it "debunked" ;)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:On managing outrage in Silicon Valley by brightball on Monday August 07, 2017 @05:45PM (#14951532)

The only way to avoid that would be to highlight the parts of the discussion that hadn't been studied or couldn't easily be replicated. In my experience, most heated arguments are based on perceptions where there is a gaping hole because science either can't or hasn't completely answered the question yet.

That stuff gets fueled by articles leaving out certain numbers to show a desired conclusion.

True or False isn't the problem. The problem is avoiding key points that you have to already be knowledgable enough to realize what's missing. That's how people end up with "facts" that are still wrong.

You leave out important information to reinforce a bias and it will get reshared as "fact".

Happens all the time with any topic that's even a little heated.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:On managing outrage in Silicon Valley by wolco on Monday August 07, 2017 @07:13PM (#14952068)

Science is fluid and is funded by agenda our understanding is rarely 100% so often you can only see one side. In a world where ideas are funded you usually get a bias view.

Googling and searching can give you a scan of total web assessible content.

Ultimately you need to either review available knowledge and make decisions or put your trust into an external entity.

[ Parent | on HN ]