Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   taoeffect (taoeffect@mstdn.io)'s status on Thursday, 18-May-2023 03:23:29 JST taoeffect

   in reply to

   • Hyolobrika

   .@Hyolobrika points out a promising alternative to Wikipedia: https://encyclosphere.org by estranged Wikipedia co-founder @lsanger.

   If I'm reading this correctly, a federated version of Wikipedia definitely sounds like an upgrade over what we have today.

   • Embed this notice
     hyolobrika@berserker.town's status on Thursday, 18-May-2023 03:23:29 JST Hyolobrika

     in reply to

     @taoeffect
     It's cool, but they have a bias against "Mastodon" because they think it's inherently "leftist".
     @lsanger

     Fish in the percolator likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     taoeffect (taoeffect@mstdn.io)'s status on Thursday, 18-May-2023 03:23:30 JST taoeffect

     in reply to

     These two biases are some of the most powerful biases that affect humans.

     So consider this a reminder that you are the easiest person to fool, and ask yourself: "In what ways have I been allowing my own confirmation bias, my in-group, to delude my thinking?"

   • Embed this notice
     taoeffect (taoeffect@mstdn.io)'s status on Thursday, 18-May-2023 03:23:33 JST taoeffect

     in reply to

     One last note (I think), and that is one more lesson from this tale: your cognitive biases can be used as a weapon against you.

     In this case I exploited two extremely powerful cognitive biases: group-think and confirmation bias, and used that against the Wikipedia editors.

   • Embed this notice
     taoeffect (taoeffect@mstdn.io)'s status on Thursday, 18-May-2023 03:23:34 JST taoeffect

     in reply to

     Far better, I think, is to start your own Wikipedia.

     This is the path taken by https://wikispooks.com, and it's why I promote these sorts of projects.

     Yes, the world is full of stupidity. If people want to be dumb, let them, and do your own thing.

   • Embed this notice
     taoeffect (taoeffect@mstdn.io)'s status on Thursday, 18-May-2023 03:23:36 JST taoeffect

     in reply to

     Generally speaking, I'd advise against doing this sort of thing. While the Wikipedia page did end up improving (in my eyes), I never did it again.

     It really brings up the question of whether the ends justify the means, even when the subject in question is a dumb Wikipedia page.

   • Embed this notice
     taoeffect (taoeffect@mstdn.io)'s status on Thursday, 18-May-2023 03:23:37 JST taoeffect

     in reply to

     What is the lesson here?

     False flags are incredibly effective at fooling people.

     But also: if you’re going to do it, you shouldn’t actually attack any real people. People’s lives are not games to be played with. Only psychopaths think that way.

   • Embed this notice
     taoeffect (taoeffect@mstdn.io)'s status on Thursday, 18-May-2023 03:23:39 JST taoeffect

     in reply to

     Little did they notice that in reverting the edit my other account had snuck in wording that completely undermined the original wording on the page.

   • Embed this notice
     taoeffect (taoeffect@mstdn.io)'s status on Thursday, 18-May-2023 03:23:40 JST taoeffect

     in reply to

     I made the same edit again, and then reverted it from another IP address, chastising myself.

     The Matrix editors were pleased to see someone else taking their side, saying, “see? Even this person thinks you’re wrong.”

     I left the page unedited after that and so did they.

   • Embed this notice
     taoeffect (taoeffect@mstdn.io)'s status on Thursday, 18-May-2023 03:23:42 JST taoeffect

     I once performed a false-flag attack… on a Wikipedia page.

     A certain page about a popular aliens-related concept was rather poorly written in a very gate-keepy way. I tried to improve it but the Matrix editors wouldn’t let me.

     So what did I do?