A sequence that we see all the time in the world of junk science

Re:A sequence that we see all the time in the world of junk ... by agumonkey on Saturday March 19, 2022 @09:14PM (#30739097)

Since the war I also noticed a fractal rabbit-hole flavor of the fog of war. You can be argued into oblivion because of past information. While trying to discuss with both camps I see incomplete arguments, referring to previous arguments, that refers to previous arguments. The current conflict being partly due to west/east tensions, birth of nato, cold war.. you can even go back to 1917 according to wikipedia. You can also read articles or books and may never be able to conclude anything [0]. I'm not sure it's coordinated fuzzing at the social level. Just say whatever and point fingers at "facts" so the other camp starts to wonder if there's something, meanwhile you keep doing what you do (invade).

[0] fans of Burn after reading might rejoyce.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A sequence that we see all the time in the world of junk ... by WalterGR on Saturday March 19, 2022 @09:42PM (#30739237)

It seems like you’re referring to the origins of the conflict and not what’s happening on the ground right now.

It also seems like you’re not sure who’s to blame for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Is that the case?

I'm not sure it's coordinated fuzzing at the social level.

What would that look like? People on opposite sides making opposing claims?

What about meta-commentary that both sides have equally compelling arguments and that it’s impossible to know which side is right?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A sequence that we see all the time in the world of junk ... by agumonkey on Saturday March 19, 2022 @10:05PM (#30739366)

No, I'm wondering if internet gave the idea to some state security agency to cook a mind vacuum by showing bits of potential evidence (1991 agreements, past aggressions, shifting blame) so that people will waste time and energy in sterile debate.

I was reading a series on a .ru sites about history of russian computing, whose author claimed a lot of faults with the soviet system that caused a their demise. But in the comments a few russians (or bots ... I don't know anything anymore at that point) were quick to point at that, the author analysis was fragile, giving him other data points about missing events, or developments.

All to say that even when you try to document yourself.. you never know the whole story. Unless maybe you start an absolute quest of truth to cross all data points. And even then, data can still be wrong (people might forget to record stuff, or deliberately ignore some).

[ Parent | on HN ]