• Nyanix@lemmy.caEnglish
    19·
    2 hours ago

    ngl, I don’t comment nearly as often anymore out of concern for anything I say to be misconstrued, argued, or wanting verification like this meme. Ya’ll, I’ve got a job and a life, I can’t/don’t want to sit here and fight people. The worst gets assumed of anything and it gets difficult to have productive, much less positive discourse online.

    • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
      15·
      2 hours ago

      This is also due to a distinct drop in reader comprehension. One of the largest parts of reading comprehension is being able to infer the intended audience for a particular piece of work. You should be able to read a news article, see a commercial, read a comment, etc and infer who it is aimed at. And the answer is usually not “me”.

      People have become accustomed to having an algorithm that is laser focused to their specific preferences. So when they see something that’s not aimed at them it is jarring, and they tend to get upset. Instead of going “oh this clearly isn’t aimed at me, but I can infer who the intended audience is. I’ll move on.” Now they tend to jump on the creator with whataboutisms and imagined offense.

      Maybe you make a post about the proper way to throw a football. You’ll inevitably get a few “bUT wHaT abOUt WhEElcHaiR uSerS, I hAvE a baD ShoUlDer aNd cAn’T thROW SO wHaT abOUt me, I haTE FoOtbAll wHY aRe yOU SHowiNG tHIs to Me, etc” types of comments. It’s because those users have lost the ability to infer an intended audience. They automatically assume everything they see is aimed at them, and get offended when it isn’t.

      I have even noticed this started to affect the way media is written. Creators tend to make it a point to outright state their intended audience, just to avoid the negative comments.

      • ilhamagh@lemmy.world
        2·
        30 minutes ago

        Hmm good point. Never realized there could be connection with hyper curated algorithm and main character syndrome.

        Now I kinda understand why “just look away” makes no sense to these kinda people.

    • Darkenfolk@dormi.zone
      2·
      43 minutes ago

      What, feeling too good for an unproductive Internet fight with strangers who probably would agree with you if they could read?

  • Toribor@corndog.socialEnglish
    12·
    3 hours ago

    I asked my employer provided AI assistant if this is true and it assured me that natural snowfall was disinformation invented by leftists in order to destroy our capitalist utopia.

  • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
    22·
    4 hours ago

    I’ve already had people demand “source?” for the most mundane facts. Why yes steroids do enhance physical ability.

  • root_beer@midwest.socialEnglish
    63·
    2 hours ago

    Hidden panel: guy on left saying “google it yourself, don’t expect me to have to teach you anything”

    Why should anyone ever have to substantiate their claims???

    • NutWrench@lemmy.world
      61·
      2 hours ago

      I would just assume that anyone who needed a cite for really obvious stuff is just trolling.

      • root_beer@midwest.socialEnglish
        4·
        2 hours ago

        Yeah, I suppose the obvious stuff, sure

        Guess I’m just rankled by seeing so many people making baseless claims and then telling everyone to figure it out themselves when they get called out on it, and it’s not the same as this.

  • AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee
    298·
    5 hours ago

    Let’s not vilify people asking for citations. With AI it’s more important than ever to verify what you’re reading.

    • abbenm@lemmy.ml
      591·
      5 hours ago

      I’m absolutely okay with vilifying people asking for sources on the historical existence of snow.

      • underisk [none/use name]@hexbear.netEnglish
        1·
        1 hour ago

        The historical existence of snow depends on where you’re talking about. Climate is changing but not every manifestation of that will cause less snow. It’s possible some places start getting more as rising temperatures create more moisture in the air in places that are historically cold and dry. For example, parts of the mountains here in Nevada had unusually high snowfall, like Lee’s Canyon While looking at (what appears to be) the historical data for the US overall doesn’t seem to show a significant deviation at a cursory glance.

        Saying these things are obviously true while not bothering to check if they’re factually accurate is misrepresenting the problem and leaves openings for climate denialists to make themselves more credible. “You said snowfall was going down but it just saw record snowfall in the news!” Which is a bad argument but a convincing one to people who aren’t inclined to deal with a global apocalyptic problem.

  • Fleur_@lemm.eeEnglish
    72·
    7 hours ago

    The evil version of this is when people cite a click bait article, you go to the article and read the attached study and the study is not backing up their claims in any meaningful way. Like come on bro you clearly haven’t read this study don’t cite it and claim I need to educate myself.

    • ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net
      28·
      5 hours ago

      Average YouTube influencer for me.

      It’s gotten even worse in the past year. Most of them sound like they’re parroting AI summaries of blog posts and sprinkling stupid ass cutaway gags to memes. Like rather than actually consuming the entire body of context around a subject and having an informed take, they’re just giving shallow thoughts and trying to monetize.

      Any YouTuber whose whole angle is to spicy commentary on current events in tech/programming is definitely part of the trash heap.

  • IHeartBadCode@fedia.io
    53·
    10 hours ago

    I literally had to cite the page number from the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023 Public Law 117-328 that covered how the $800M that Trump keeps telling everyone FEMA spent on migrants was a completely different fund than the disaster relief fund that FEMA uses for hurricanes. Which the DRF was established originally as it’s own fund in the Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act of 1988 Public Law 100-707

    It’s page 4,730 where that item is located for anyone wondering.

    I fucking hate what online interactions have become. I think I’ve easily read over 200,000 pages of government legislation, federal regulation, and legal proceedings since June because of the lies one orange shit stain keeps telling. I really do hope that the Republicans can move past that fucker, it was a lot easier to talk politics.

    • dubious@lemmy.world
      2·
      2 hours ago

      what do any of us do when logical, good faith arguments fail and the future of the world depends on convincing idiots that the sky is blue? serious question.

    • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
      11·
      5 hours ago

      Because they want to exhaust the person engaging in a good faith discussion. It’s far more labor intensive to have to look for, find, verify for contextual correctness, quote and link said sources, then argue why one’s position is factually correct.

      And all the other person has to do is cite some patently false bullshit in 5 seconds and disregard the argument.

      • nomous@lemmy.world
        1·
        1 hour ago

        Aka, “Why Don’t You Respond to Criticism?”

        It all boils down to bad faith. They don’t care what argument you make, you’ll never sway them. They’re not interested in the debate with you as much as as they are just getting their bullshit out there for randos to read. Like you say, while you’re finding sources and making sure everyone agrees on terminology they’ve already said 3 more things that are completely wrong.

    • abbenm@lemmy.ml
      19·
      8 hours ago

      I bet they saw the source and said “oh, yes, thank you for the source, I have updated my opinion based on this new information.”