[HN Gopher] Beware what sounds insightful
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Beware what sounds insightful
        
       Author : janandonly
       Score  : 51 points
       Date   : 2022-02-28 14:08 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (commoncog.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (commoncog.com)
        
       | Animats wrote:
       | Amusing quotes:
       | 
       |  _" A "steering" event at the CEO level is a reorientation for
       | the entire company, and for reasons I'll get to, the best way to
       | accomplish it is to replace the CEO with a new one who is already
       | locked on to a more desirable orientation vector."_
       | 
       | In other words, it may be easier to change the CEO than the CEO's
       | mind. (A possibly useful criterion: when did the CEO last admit a
       | mistake? If the answer is "never", and reality indicates the need
       | for a change of direction, the CEO has to go.)
       | 
       |  _" Also: look at how I use the phrase 'optimised for attention'
       | here, when I could have just as simply said 'liked to be read'."_
       | 
       | Not quite. "Optimized for click-through", more specifically.
       | Here's a topic from CNN right now: "Certain health conditions in
       | adolescence may be linked with faster aging in adulthood, study
       | says." Note that this doesn't tell you what those conditions are.
       | You have to click to find out. That's become all too common.
       | Until recently, the unit of consumer buy was the book or
       | newspaper, not the article. There was no incentive for article
       | titles which deliberately gave too little information. That
       | stopped at headlines and book titles. Now it extends to each
       | little snippet of information. The actual article can be
       | summarized as "Teens who are fat, smoke, or have psych problems
       | age faster." If they said that up front, fewer people would click
       | on the article.
        
         | javajosh wrote:
         | _> In other words, it may be easier to change the CEO than the
         | CEO's mind._
         | 
         | Makes me wonder, is that a bad thing? Do we want CEOs with
         | plastic minds? It feels like we live in an age of excess
         | plasticity, with respect to leadership. (Perhaps it always
         | does.)
        
           | whatshisface wrote:
           | Even if the entire power structure agrees not to change,
           | reality still will.
        
       | swayvil wrote:
       | To take this further. A world made of words and ideas, detached
       | from real observation, must necessarily be completely psychotic.
       | 
       | We're talking Bosch's Garden here. Demons, skulls, fire and
       | snakes.
       | 
       | Consider our modern nigh-solipsistic society. And videogames. And
       | us, wrapped in an airtight bag of propaganda and entertainment.
       | 
       | Consider that excellent insulation. Consider the anaerobic
       | ravioli.
        
       | jstummbillig wrote:
       | That sounds insightful tho...
        
       | hitekker wrote:
       | A similar point was raised in
       | https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348755905_The_Seduc...
       | which was surfaced at
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30354969.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | photochemsyn wrote:
       | Tarbell's portrayal of JD Rockefeller is certainly worth reading
       | again in today's New Gilded Age era, biases and all. I suppose
       | Daniel Yergin's "The Prize" is a more objective history, although
       | it glosses over some of the more outrageous history of the
       | industry (Standard Oil providing critical airplane fuel for the
       | Nazi invasion of Poland, and also fueling Nazi Uboats until 1942
       | when Congress passed the Trading With The Enemy Act).
        
         | paganel wrote:
         | Trading between nations that are in open conflict is kind of
         | interesting. For example in this case yes, Standard Oil was
         | providing the Nazis with fuel, but presumably they were getting
         | paid in return and part of that money was funding the US
         | Government through taxes paid by Standard Oil, directly of
         | indirectly.
         | 
         | There's also the Nazis' pov, of course, for lack of a better
         | term. One could say that they were giving money/liquidity (I
         | suppose US dollars, not sure on this one) directly to one of
         | the enemies they were fighting.
         | 
         | Like I said, these type of examples (which are pretty rare, at
         | least to my knowledge) can be pretty interesting if you start
         | going into the details.
        
       | Noumenon72 wrote:
       | I really appreciated the named names and real examples.
       | Unfortunately, I wasn't able to break free of the insight
       | distortion field and see the examples as dumb. I'm the same with
       | academese -- as long as I know all of the big words, I feel like
       | they've said something intelligible.
        
       | danielmarkbruce wrote:
       | Beware of logical sounding narratives in general. They almost
       | always miss a variable or four.
        
         | Jensson wrote:
         | Which is why you read the comments instead of the article, they
         | always find like ten of those four mistakes.
        
       | compressedgas wrote:
       | Also the illusion of explanatory depth.
        
       | feoren wrote:
       | One reason I almost always read the comments before the article
       | on Hacker News is that the comments have less control over the
       | narrative, so it's harder to get away with these tricks. People
       | also love to write things like "well duh: of course writers
       | optimize for attention, that's literally their job!" which, while
       | a little bit snotty, helps highlight occurrences of this. By
       | reading the top few comments on HN first, I feel like I get a
       | good idea of whether an article is worth reading, and if I do
       | read it I can go in "armed" to protect against this.
       | 
       | The hard part is forcing myself not to _respond_ to those
       | comments until I 've actually read the article myself.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-02-28 23:01 UTC)