Comment by mungoman2
11 hours ago
Curious about this take, how do you mean?
I understand the point of distorted facts, but what I’m not sure how things are improved by basically having no trust in any facts?
11 hours ago
Curious about this take, how do you mean?
I understand the point of distorted facts, but what I’m not sure how things are improved by basically having no trust in any facts?
One of my professors at Uni a year ago was arguing that due to genAI we would have a shift of trust into established institutions/people, so government (I'm not American so I don't know if this is possible after many recent scandals for example), Universities, people with authority/knowledge, close family members that are trust worthy, knowledgeable and/or work in before mentioned institutions. So basically we would revert to pre-web times where we had to trust some entities whenever we liked it or not.
I personally worry that what that would mean is we are left with little to no institutions to trust, besides Universities and family members, I don't think I would be able to trust governments and corporations, but I guess before internet people also weren't blindly trusting those.
I doubt the new trust bearers will be anything like governments and universities because trust in them has been severely eroded. Sadly, they will be select Youtubers and Internet influencers.
I’m not the original poster, but I think they are saying if we are more skeptical about what we read, we are less likely to absorb propaganda as fact.
This is kinda cute because it glosses over the lack of critical thinking skills, lack of research skills, and willingness to believe magic bullets, which would make most of us believe nothing of substance and yet fall for anyone with a silver tongue. Heck, we’re already dangerously close to that without LLMs.