Recent comments in /f/science

AutoModerator t1_jb0a28u wrote

Reply to Identifying Polarized Twitter Echo Chambers: A Case Study that identified a German echo chamber of 66K accounts mainly focused on topics like Anti-Covid Populism, Right-Wing Populism and Pro-Russian positions | Open Access by [deleted]

Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our normal comment rules apply to all other comments.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

6763497asda t1_jb08k42 wrote

Reply to comment by AutomaticOrange4417 in On Facebook, Visual Misinfo Widespread. In the runup to the 2020 U.S. Presidential election visual misinformation was widespread across the platform, and that it was highly asymmetric across party lines, with right-leaning images five to eight times more likely to be misleading. by Wagamaga

It is not a comparison actually he is just talking about the length of propaganda and the scams which are present on the Facebook.

He is not saying that one thing is better than the other.

5

eldenrim t1_jb06qmo wrote

Reply to comment by MoonWispr in Too much or too little sleep could be making you sick more. Those who reported sleeping less than six hours a night were 27% more likely to report a recent infection, and those who reported more than nine hours sleep were 44% more likely to report one. by MistWeaver80

Which is essentially what I'm saying, but that by trying and failing to correct your sleep, you'll know it's a deeper issue and can look at that.

But now, people with atypical sleep and immune issues that ignore one (or both) might be stirred into some reflection and subsequent action. The knowledge helps even if it's correlation, is all I mean.

1

fractiousrhubarb t1_jb03p6p wrote

Reply to comment by CaudallyReinsure396 in On Facebook, Visual Misinfo Widespread. In the runup to the 2020 U.S. Presidential election visual misinformation was widespread across the platform, and that it was highly asymmetric across party lines, with right-leaning images five to eight times more likely to be misleading. by Wagamaga

People have different world models, but the difference between a delusion and reality is that reality is still there when you stop believing in it.

In this case you could repeat the same experiment (ie, looking at the same set of posts) and fact check them against reality (an example of which could be political voting records) to find out if they contained misinformation, categorize them on whether which party they supported and tabulate the results.

It wouldn't be perfect, but it would be a reasonable and justifiable description of reality.

1

SnooPuppers1978 t1_jb0215s wrote

Reply to comment by mindfu in On Facebook, Visual Misinfo Widespread. In the runup to the 2020 U.S. Presidential election visual misinformation was widespread across the platform, and that it was highly asymmetric across party lines, with right-leaning images five to eight times more likely to be misleading. by Wagamaga

> For example, anything implying vaccines don't work

Even this statement can be understood in multitude of different ways. What does "not work" even mean? Did the vaccines work in creating herd immunity? No. Did vaccines work in terms of reducing deaths and hospitalisations? Yes.

> Fauci tried engineering covid with Bill Gates

Can also be interpreted/understood in multitude of different ways.

So interpreter can choose to interpret those in any biased way to that interpreter. For example they can choose on the first statement to mean, that this statement implies that vaccine have had absolutely no positive effect at all which makes the statement false, while bias in other direction could interpret it that vaccines didn't do what was initially publicly advertised or promised which makes the statement true for them if they consider public advertising claiming that you wouldn't get infected.

Like you could go into this thought pattern of, "these crazies certainly mean that not work means that vaccines don't have absolutely any positive effect, non biased person can see that, so surely that's the correct way to interpret it. This statement makes them not get the vaccine so I'm definitely in the right in determining this statement to be misinformation", but it doesn't seem wholly scientific to me. Fact is pandemic still proceeded even after vaccine rollout, so in some sense they did work, but did they work enough? Does saying "not work" mean "not work to end the pandemic or not work at all"?

And you are saying "implying not work", which would be even more unclear, than a clear statement of saying "they don't work". Implying not to work, could be someone just claiming they got infected even though they took the vaccine and being frustrated about it.

If you determine that any message that would get people to vaccinate, is "true information" and anything that might make them avoid getting to do that is "misinformation", it might be more obvious. But is that what you are looking for? Because certainly you can say truths either way and definitely lie in any direction.

On the "not work" topic, you take this fact check as an example:

https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-coronavirus-gates-idUSL1N2S7292

So you can see that all sides are cherry picking/biased here.

Reuters title said that the original statement is "Fact Check-Bill Gates did not say COVID-19 vaccines are ineffective"

  1. Where did anyone claim "Bill Gates said COVID-19 vaccines are ineffective". Maybe somewhere someone did, but in the examples, I'm seeing "not working well" which is clearly a subjective statement.
  2. Next ineffective in terms of what? Ineffective in terms of blocking transmission? Bill Gates did strongly imply that.
  3. etc, etc, etc. So all sides have at least some amount of bias here, either in how they interpret the claims, how they fill in the blanks, etc.
2

CaudallyReinsure396 t1_jb00upf wrote

Reply to comment by fractiousrhubarb in On Facebook, Visual Misinfo Widespread. In the runup to the 2020 U.S. Presidential election visual misinformation was widespread across the platform, and that it was highly asymmetric across party lines, with right-leaning images five to eight times more likely to be misleading. by Wagamaga

The concept of reality is different for everyone because everyone has different kind of ideologies that they believe in.

And what you may think is true or not depends on which side you are on.

1