Confirmation Bias

[Biggles]

It's a thought-provoking (but also blatantly biased and over the top) doc. I do think it has a big point to make, and I wish it had made that point a little more factually. Our brains are not wired to handle the degree of filtering we've been handed. There was something rolling around in the back of my head the whole time I was watching it though. How can increased information not lead to polarization? I mean sure, you can get everyone to toe the line and agree if you feed them a single news source that they can all just agree with. But when you give them lots of news, gasp, they get upset about stuff... and different stuff too! That's polarization.

Biased? Well, it has a point to make - it's not an all-sides-of-the-story documentary. The views presented are those of industry insiders who have become alarmed by what they see as the unforeseen consequences of the rapid spread of social media.

The viewpoint is that a) the polarization is not good ... that b) most people are unaware of the existence of algorithms that are dictating what people see ... & c) the social media companies actually financial benefit from promoting polarization. The case is also made that over-exposure to social media is having a serious effect on the mental health of young people.

The problem is, people are not getting "lots of news". They are getting a filtered source that is feeding them a steady, uninterrupted stream of confirmation bias. I am not active on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram or any other similar apps. GTPlanet & a couple of other similar (non-sim racing!) websites is about it. But I have watched as my (previously more or less "normal") 56 year old cousin has gone further & further down the QAnon rabbit-hole on Facebook (& who knows what other social media sites) over the past 10 months. I can see it's going to be very, very hard for her to dig herself out of that hole.

 

[Biggles]

The problem is, people are not getting "lots of news". They are getting a filtered source that is feeding them a steady, uninterrupted stream of confirmation bias.

If anyone is in doubt about this, take a look at what is happening today in Washington. I really believe this would be unthinkable without the proliferation of social media that is constantly recirculating false information to tens of millions of people.

 

[Famine]

If anyone is in doubt about this, take a look at what is happening today in Washington. I really believe this would be unthinkable without the proliferation of social media that is constantly recirculating false information to tens of millions of people.

 

[Biggles]

Imma need some help with this post.

 

[Famine]

Imma need some help with this post.

This is the "domino effect" meme. In essence it's a physics lesson, which shows that smaller objects can topple larger ones, and this progresses to larger and larger objects before toppling the final item - though the smallest one couldn't topple the largest one on its own. In essence the small input of energy at the beginning results in much larger consequences.

The Tweet at the top - the largest object - is today's events in Washington DC. The text at the bottom - the smallest object - literally describes Facebook, a college project set up a gross, amoral pervert to rate how attractive girls in his class were ("The Face Book"), before it became the data harvesting ****sticle it is today.

Thus "a website to rate girls", as the small initial input, results in the large consequences of today's events at the Capitol.

 

[Biggles]

This is the "domino effect" meme. In essence it's a physics lesson, which shows that smaller objects can topple larger ones, and this progresses to larger and larger objects before toppling the final item - though the smallest one couldn't topple the largest one on its own. In essence the small input of energy at the beginning results in much larger consequences.

The Tweet at the top - the largest object - is today's events in Washington DC. The text at the bottom - the smallest object - literally describes Facebook, a college project set up a gross, amoral pervert to rate how attractive girls in his class were ("The Face Book"), before it became the data harvesting ****sticle it is today.

Thus "a website to rate girls", as the small initial input, results in the large consequences of today's events at the Capitol.

Got it - I'd forgotten about the "origin story" for FaceBook. Yes, exactly. There is something remarkable & deeply troubling about the incomprehensible ascendence of FaceBook & Mark Zuckerberg. It's become a Frankenstein's monster.

 

[LeMansAid]

Participation in Gtplanet's forums is an object lesson in the functioning of cognitive bias & confirmation bias. Has anyone on GTPlanet actually fundamentally reevaluated their a priori beliefs after engaging in a discussion here?

Yup. I can list a few members that have changed a lot, but I won't because it's their place rather than mine. I myself have changed from it. The GTPlanet opinion section offers an escape from confirmation bias - a chance to talk to people who oppose your own views, which is something that we are increasingly isolating ourselves from socially.

I agree with @Danoff. I've changed certain views, some dramatically, thanks to reading and posting here. So much so that the thought of being without the knowledge and perspective I've gained is actually scary.

The main reason why I've dredged up this thread, though, is that I've been wondering about an associated question...... Do "we" actually have a bias against recognising change in GTP members? The fact that this thread even exists would make me wonder, but also how some people like @HenrySwanson are treated. Maybe I'm not understanding the full story but It seems to me that HS has changed quite a bit, and has self-interrogated previously held views, but still seems to be treated with a type of ostracisation and even rudeness that suggests a wilful lack of recognition of change. Adopting logical thinking should be its own reward but it would surely be nice to give someone a figurative pat on the back every now and then to acknowledge their progress.

 

[Danoff]

I agree with @Danoff. I've changed certain views, some dramatically, thanks to reading and posting here. So much so that the thought of being without the knowledge and perspective I've gained is actually scary.

The main reason why I've dredged up this thread, though, is that I've been wondering about an associated question...... Do "we" actually have a bias against recognising change in GTP members? The fact that this thread even exists would make me wonder, but also how some people like @HenrySwanson are treated. Maybe I'm not understanding the full story but It seems to me that HS has changed quite a bit, and has self-interrogated previously held views, but still seems to be treated with a type of ostracisation and even rudeness that suggests a wilful lack of recognition of change. Adopting logical thinking should be its own reward but it would surely be nice to give someone a figurative pat on the back every now and then to acknowledge their progress.

Regarding @HenrySwanson I think I have seen what you're seeing as well.

 

[Pupik]

The text at the bottom - the smallest object - literally describes Facebook, a college project set up a gross, amoral pervert to rate how attractive girls in his class were ("The Face Book")...

Come now, in 2004 "hot-or-not" was still a thing (although GTP used it to rate cars). Had we'd each been 5-7 years younger at that point, we'd probably thought it was a nifty idea. But attitudes have changed almost two decades later.

(...And I just realized this was an 19-month-old post.)

 

[Famine]

Come now, in 2004 "hot-or-not" was still a thing (although GTP used it to rate cars). Had we'd each been 5-7 years younger at that point, we'd probably thought it was a nifty idea. But attitudes have changed almost two decades later.

(...And I just realized this was an 19-month-old post.)

They're not cause and effect statements though. Zuck is a gross, amoral pervert. And he set up The Face Book as a way of rating how attractive girls in his class were. You may affirm the consequent if you wish, of course.

 

[Duke]

Zuck is a gross, amoral pervert. And he set up The Face Book as a way of rating how attractive girls in his class were.

Which is so richly, deeply ironic, considering his own visuals.