robsblubot

The link between conspiracy theories and insight is also evident in the role that memes play in proliferating conspiracies. Take the example of Melissa Rein Lively – a former QAnon supporter who rose to fame after a video of her destroying a face mask stand at a Target store during the COVID-19 pandemic went viral (anti-vaccine beliefs are a key part of the QAnon worldview). She has cited a particular meme as being pivotal to her journey into QAnon: it features a photograph of Polish Jews being put on a train in 1939, edited so that they wore face masks. Lively – the granddaughter of Holocaust survivors – grasped the implied link between mask mandates and authoritarian injustices, causing her to experience a rewarding sense of insight. Just like participants who are required to unscramble sentences, for her that ‘aha’ feeling gave rise to a deeper acceptance of the idea. As she put it: ‘Everything I was learning and everything I have ever been afraid of connected in a way that convinced me that at least some semblance of what I was reading was true.’ We propose that the hunger for insight and discovery is present in all humans and that engagement with conspiracy theories satisfies that hunger. This helps to explain the attractiveness of conspiracist communities, such as QAnon. These communities offer participation in a collective act of discovery, wherein users aid each other in discovering clues and decoding cryptic messages to generate their own insights. Contrary to the view that conspiracy theorists don’t think hard enough, many conspiracies are popular precisely because they require hard thinking. This explanation also illuminates a potentially important cause of conspiracy theories – when people feel excluded from the kind of collective discovery that conspiracy theory communities offer. Take the example of anti-vaccine sentiments amongst new mothers. Mothers often feel that their maternal instincts and first-person experience are devalued by medical professionals. Such interactions deny them the chance to experience insight through participating in problem-solving about their children’s health. This ‘epistemic exclusion’ can lead the insight-hungry to seek out alternative views of medicine, often involving conspiratorial elements (centring around cover-ups by ‘big pharma’, for example). Consistent with this, people who reject mainstream medicine in favour of such alternatives often emphasise that they are only exercising their right to engage in their own truth-seeking activities. Designing effective insight-based interventions relies on getting to know your audience If we’re right about the role of insight in conspiratorial thinking, governments could apply the psychology of insight to design interventions that better combat conspiracy theories. Up until now a standard approach has been to focus on countering misinformation (through factchecking or providing information that contradicts it). But this treats those who consume misinformation as passive victims, rather than active and enthusiastic participants. It ignores the drive for discovery at the heart of much engagement with misinformation. A better approach is to take the drive for discovery seriously, which will require countering misinformation with the same spirit of intellectual playfulness that draws people to it. For example, interventions could work with engaging questions and puzzles instead of factual statements. An important step in designing effective insight-based interventions of this kind is simple: know your audience. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the ‘vaccine zombie’ metaphor resonated among the anti-vaccine community because it tapped into the way they thought of vaccine users. Designing a more accurate, but equally attractive, metaphor requires a firm understanding of the beliefs and attitudes of those who believe in conspiracies. Gaining such knowledge relies on getting to know your audience. A relevant distinction is between perspective-taking and perspective-getting – don’t just try to put yourself in someone else’s shoes (perspective-taking); genuinely enquire about how they see the world (perspective-getting). That knowledge can then be employed to connect with communities that believe in conspiracies. Another way is to represent people’s lived experience. People gain a sense of insight when recognising a link with their personal experiences. The meme that Lively encountered about face masks resonated with her so strongly because she was the daughter of Holocaust survivors – she uncovered a surprising link with her own perspective. This suggests that effective interventions should connect with people’s experiences. One approach to delivering insight-based interventions could be via developments in AI, which hold the promise of countering conspiracy thinking via personalised interactions. For example, in a recent study, interactions with ChatGPT-4 Turbo substantially and durably shifted the beliefs of even the staunchest of believers in conspiracies ranging from the causes of COVID-19 to the Moon landings to the death of Princess Diana. Analysing these conversations showed that the model didn’t simply present counterevidence but questioned and reasoned with users. Although users were not explicitly asked to report insight experiences, we would venture that such experiences were a crucial mechanism underlying their shift in beliefs. The mind-changing potential of these systems is bound to continue to grow. They already have more ‘patience’ than any human for gaining our idiosyncratic perspective through dialogue. As they can ingest more information about us, they will be able to simulate our positions more effectively. That will allow them to challenge us at the just-right level – eventually coming up with new, resonating metaphors and pointed questions. We are hopeful that such personal(ised) AI assistants will help to prevent and counter harmful beliefs at scale (but they will need to be implemented carefully, given the risk of misuse). Conspiracy believers are not unintelligent and gullible. They are driven by their hunger for insight. Whether via AI or other media, recognising and respecting this hunger is the way towards more effective interventions. I’m not sure this is the root cause; the hunger has always been there. it’s missing the “what’s different now” question. Which is what is addressed in the Yuval interview I posted earlier: fiction is cheaper (to produce) and the algos treat all info the same. So, junk becomes abundant by sheer volume.

I'm not a fan, but it's really strange for Rabiot to be a free agent at 29. There are talks about United, but what a weird career move by the player and agent. Not as strange as 30yo Depay at Corinthians in Brazil, but close.

Expect to see more of Maresca for this game. The first match was understandably reactive low block counter-attacking a la Poch. The second match was slightly different and not for the better. I hope to see more possession and more control, even if that does not translate into actual dominance. On the other hand, we have enough quality in the squad that should get us unlikely wins here and there. I think Cole is pretty hard to contain when he's having a good match, for ex. Can't wait!

Pretty interesting recent interview with Yuval Harari -- it's long (an hour), but worthwhile IMO I think the title is very misleading btw. It's pretty much about about information networks. He goes more into Social Media algos and makes a clever analogy between them and news(paper) editors as the "deciders" in what makes the news.

More serious numbers only by next week, and still irrelevant given that they fight for a small sliver of people in the battleground states. "This is one of the tragic things about our political system, that they needed to convince a small sliver of the most checked-out voters in the states that actually matter. I mean, this is no way to run a democracy, but it is what it is." by Michelle Goldberg (NYT podcast)

Musk? The entrepreneur and business man? Unlikely even if some of his spaceX stuff lands (no pun). The unelected world leader? Nope. There is nothing remarkable about that guy aside from his creepiness, which happens to be fairly common in social media.

Very aware mistyped.

"Monaco and Brazil defender Vanderson, 23, is attracting strong interest from Chelsea, while Manchester United and Tottenham are also among his admirers. (Caughtoffside)" I've watched him a lot when still a Gremio in 21. He was fantastic going forward, and not that great defending. As much I want to think he's learned to defend, I think it's safe to considering him an attacking fullback. He reminds me of walker because of the build and pace... frankly he'd be a perfect fit for City, IMO. We are loaded on the RB unless club is giving up on James.

First the illegal aliens are eating pets. Now he's concerned about the sexual identity of the imprisoned illegal aliens? 😆 It hit me right after the debate I did not watch: even if both ridiculous claims were true, why should such small nonsense be the subject in a presidential debate? Shouldn't they discuss things remotely related to being a president instead? Strange times.

Also called her Biden a couple of times apparently. 😆

Totally unfair! that's all Trump talks about. 😃 Same, jested about the importance of being a good debater to run a country earlier... so silly. The main quality for me is the ability to surround yourself with the best people; Trump brought in his family and friends when president... I rest my case. On the other hand, this isn't about us is it? So, the question is whether it moves the needle enough or not. I think it will, but not a whole lot. People who aren't already shocked by the nonsense trumps utters all the time weren't shocked yesterday. So, looking at the debate from our point of view isn't the right take IMO. Not really. It's out of context, but she did vote on something stupid like that back in 19.

Big mistake going after her ... CAT! 🤣 Trump, "I had nothing to do with Jan 6." WTF

Who gives a fuck about the debate... TAYLOR SWIFT FTW! 😆

That only suggests where his main deficiencies are, and it actually makes his case worse in my book. He clearly lacks the temperament for competitive football, which isn't something that can be developed. Considering the above, he'd have to compensate that with unbelievable skill and I happen to think his technique is overrated; he just shows too much of the football at times. I suspect Italy might be a good place for him due to the slower pace of the game there--similar to Cuadrado.

Plus he's old now and slurring a lot. Which may actually be helpful to him... benefit of the doubt for all that crap coming out of his mouth. Watching a presidential debate is like watching two generals playing "a very serious game of darts" to determine who is the most capable at leading the military in a war. 😅

Yeah I know. Watched interviews with some of the republicans involved with it. The timing was unfortunate tho… there was no way Trump's campaign would be ok with it.

Yeah I am familiar with the bill and you’ve shared it before — not suggesting it shouldn’t be shared again. It’s really easy to simply ask the same questions the police used to understand situations, “who benefits from this?” on the other hand, this bill so close to the election was doomed from the get-go; the timing also looks a bit suspicious from the dems—like get something out to help elections.

While that's part of it, speaking of Brazil which is what I'm familiar with, it goes back farther than that. The differences between Brazil and US, for example, go back to independence (Brazil did not get a clean slate) and even the kind of immigration before that. Brazil is also held back by having had a military dictatorship not so long ago; there are traces of that everywhere still. The economy is growing steadily though, but it's just so very slow to change status quo. BTW, I know nothing of Mexico and it's very typical for people there to know little about Mexican culture and history given it's really a North American country.

😅 Now the part that hurts dems is the "illegal" part, and I have a hard time defending that. There are a lot of people in South America who could improve their lives by moving to the US. Should the USA take 100m people in just because? Of course the who's responsible for this mess part gets a bit more nuanced, but the situation does benefit the Republican Party more (politically).

Certainly. It does limit opportunity tho. Some of their kids would have the opportunity to break away, which is the case for most immigrant families.

"the Haitian" may mean that one crazy roaming downtown (plenty of Americans doing that and some are vets too), a family, a small group of people, a peoples. That's the language Trump uses too, and it's intentionally ambiguous. Now, on the merit, some don't adapt, others do. Some never learn English, while some do. It goes into a number of different factors which are often outside of their control. Some are too ignorant to know what's important, that often takes a generation to change. Most just want a better life.

The number of people who actually *worked* with or for him who say the same thing is staggering.

I keep hearing a republican when referring to Trump... is he? a former registered Democrat and party donor, Trump was never really about any of the so called republican values throughout his life. Him being a Republican leader is as much of a transactional marriage as his real one. "Trump warned he will jail election officials he considers cheats; is complaining Pennsylvania’s voting is a fraud; vowed to pardon January 6 rioters; railed against women who accused him of sexual misconduct; and spent hours in recent days on sometimes incoherent rants that raised questions about his state of mind." https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/09/politics/trump-debate-prep-analysis/index.html the media has already normalized how batshit crazy he is, but personally, none of this matters; all you need is Jan 6th.

Right and imagine the money pressure coming from the oil industry. I mean there is a huge momentary incentive *for* the identity manipulation. I was inevitable for the "smart moneys" to find their way into politics... low-hanging fruit.