• 1 Post
  • 52 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 8th, 2023

help-circle
  • I didn’t link Wikipedia because people like you tend to jump on links to Wikipedia with big brain takes about how the article is probably controlled by whoever their boogeyman is.

    Both the articles I linked, SCMP which you dismissed because it has China in its name and Daily Telegraph are from the Wikipedia article references if you care to look.

    There is nothing to be skeptical about in terms of my sources. There is at this point no credible evidence he was the high level Chinese defecting spy he was presented as initially (just like they’re presenting this one). At this point, it would be incumbent on anyone claiming he is a high level defecting spy to prove it, because even the Australians realized they were had and gave up on suggesting that. Or maybe not so much had as no longer useful for their purpose of pushing a narrative.
















  • Great, now take the same freedom fighter bots and tell them to argue IP policy on social media online. We can hear all about the right minded ways to think about intellectual property and how all the comments around here are misinformation.

    It’s like people lose their minds when you throw an enemy into the sentence. I don’t think these people crafting propaganda bots are heroes, even if they are on “my” team. Go down this road, and you can throw away forums like Lemmy, it’ll just be bots arguing with bots.


  • Honestly, if you look at it in a vacuum, this looks pretty similar to what the other side is doing.

    It’s a bot that draws from its own side’s narratives and pushes that line.

    Take away Russia from the picture and think about how often our media pushes a spin on other subjects that isn’t exactly the truth.

    Doesn’t look so much like “social media propaganda bots versus AI-driven bots arguing back” as much as propaganda bots on both sides spewing whatever their masters want us to see.




  • Stay intellectually humble. It’s a huge component of wisdom in my observation. Understand you can always make mistakes that can be corrected, and that you have arrived at your opinions through limited information that can always be supplemented, so stay open to both of these possibilities.

    You can be confident in your opinions that you arrived upon through spending a lot of effort thinking about them, and you don’t need to have self doubt when challenged on them baselessly. But when someone does point out an error or something you missed, it’s essential you haven’t become closed to accepting it.

    Always remember what the basis are for your opinions and how well-founded they really are. For example: how much do you actually know about a thing when you’re relying on something you read in the news? How much do they really know about that thing?

    As a check on yourself believing you’ve put a lot of effort into thinking about something, be on the guard for unwarranted confidence. If a professional has put their efforts into something in their field of expertise they’ve spent their whole lives working on, chances are you haven’t thought of something they haven’t in the first five minutes of hearing about their work. That might seem ridiculous, but you see this all the time on Lemmy, where for example commenters seem to think they’ve figured out key errors in scientific papers after reading a single popular science article about an experiment or figured out solutions to incredibly complex problems like fair taxation.