this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2024
299 points (98.1% liked)

Skeptic

1257 readers
3 users here now

A community for Scientific Skepticism:

Scientific skepticism or rational skepticism, sometimes referred to as skeptical inquiry, is a position in which one questions the veracity of claims lacking empirical evidence.

Do not confuse this with General Skepticism, Philosophical Skepticism, or Denialism.

Things we like:

Things we don't like:

Other communities of interest:

"A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence." -David Hume

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 month ago

Honestly, this is why I really like the hard sciences.

The default human way of thinking is to revert towards ideas that are conventional, intuitive and convenient.

In the hard sciences, it is usually (but not always) celebrated when someone comes with new kick-ass evidence to overturn conventual wisdom.

Often, this celebration lags by a few years or decades and scientists often only get credit after their death.

But still, it's better than regurgitating the same old ideas that some ancient bros thought of when they drank a bit too much mead.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Science doesn’t care about your feelings. Pseudoscience tries to tiptoe around or embrace your feelings.

[–] acosmichippo 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

pseudoscience manipulates your feelings. that’s the only reason it exists.

[–] negativenull 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago

Got bored reading vaccine pseudoscience (pre-covid by several years). Then got to hear every single damn claim dusted off and brought back to mainstream news.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

And then once you start to understand the ways that ideas are corrupted by hacks, you can start to see the same sort of behaviour even when it has an official stamp of approval from an ostensibly legitimate organization. Take the 'cybersecurity' grift, for example, in which technical wizards pretend that they can definitively secure your vital computer systems, even with an always-on Internet connection, if you give them enough money.

[–] fishpen0 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

With a magic one size fits all solution that happens to also be a rootkit that by default rewrites itself on automatic updates.

If you’re still with me please read about EBPF and why it can be used to do EDR style monitoring without a rootkit on any modern flavor of Linux. It can also be used to replace your monitoring and observability stack shims in your product. It was built by kernel developers and is already baked into your OS.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 month ago

The man behind the curtain is the intentional problems that are baked into your hardware, like how phones have a battery that can't be disconnected from the wireless devices at all.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The only ones that I buy into are the ones about that giant AT&T building in NYC with no windows that pretty much all communications route through, and the NSA building south of SLC that is storing exabytes of data. Oh and 5 eyes.

Everything we say and do that is somehow connected to a series of tubes is getting tracked y’all. I don’t know why they need to know my family’s breakfast plans or why I asked Alexa the other day for a precise step by step guide on how to manufacture a nuclear fusion bomb after watching Oppenheimer, but they are listening, they are reporting and they are tracking everything.

And honestly, I know some of the types that dig this level of surveillance, and it’s pretty unsettling that they are.