Comment by whism
5 months ago
I think you almost have a point in that you seem to be advocating for something along the lines of unbiased input (questioning the presented information because it was constructed for presentation, suggesting that an AI could somehow assist, presumably to help ground your information in a wider context etc)
I think what you may be missing is the role of trust. There is much to say about that, but in this instance, a nice thing about RSS is that I can trust the algorithm it uses to generate my feed. It is very simple, and I, myself choose the sources it draws from. With some other systems, this is not the case.
> I think you almost have a point
Thank you for almost granting me the capability of having a point. That is very nice of you.
I am not missing the role of trust. I have instead simply had that trust betrayed countless of times by now, so I'm seeking a little more. It would be a great first step, but far from the whole journey. And so I'm wary of people mistaking the latter for the former, intentionally or otherwise.
Betrayal of trust is indeed serious, and a hard lesson for many of us. Consider also that progress is made one step at a time, over a long time. While a desire for sudden, wholesale changes is understandable, it may be counterproductive. YMMV
That is not what I'm advocating for, nor are incremental steps something I'm advocating against.
What I'm advocating for is for people to not lose sight of the prize. And what I'm advocating against is misleading claims, which is what I consider the title and the proclaimed motivation of the post to be.
3 replies →