|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jul 2, 2023 9:51:17 GMT
People will tell you that in order to do so it is hard and you have to slog it out in the library, but there is a trick you are pretty much all missing. It is because in this world we live in the information comes to us. You go looking for something on the web and an AI system will decide what you most want. Even if there is no AI involved, like lets say you read a printed version of a daily paper, all the time you are making a decision on what to read.
I'd like to interject some theory at this point and say that the brain has certain modes of operation according to rhythms within it. These alter according to what you are doing, so lets say you were asleep it would be the delta wave which dominates on an EEG.For the purpose of the discussion though, the two important ones are the beta and alpha waves. Beta is normal daytime activity, like you doing your normal work. This is fine. You should be in the beta mode when studying and using your critical mind. The alpha mode is the one to watch out for. It's like a trance-like state. It's a more relaxing state where say you put on a bit of soothing music and it excites your imagination and you say you get lost in the music.It's also a pleasure inducing state. Well that is really just your brain switching from beta to alpha. This state is very bad to study and learn in as it is entirely uncritical. The important thing to note here is when looking for information in a newspaper you do not want something to flip your brain into alpha state. You are going to have to avoid being hypnotised.
Now how to achieve success. This method relies on there being two distinct types of information provider. There is the good guy and the bad guy. The good guy is going to make you more intelligent and the bad guy is going to lie, deceive , stupefy you and probably turn you gay and into an eco warrior for good measure and empty your bank account too! So how are we going to differentiate? The bad guy is an expert at looking like the good guy. This is the classic conman like say ex-PM Johnson.
Well what we need to look at is anything that is reliably common only to the bad guy. When dealing with a conman gut feeling is not going to help you out here. You can't rely on your own judgment. Luck has it that the invariant commonality we are looking for comes about because these information providers are professional and as such they are all trained in certain methods used to con you. In today's society the methods used in the training are so similar across the board that it is exactly what we need to discriminate.
The final part of the trick comes from how AI works. The entire complexity of all human knowledge has come about because of one simple factor, the ability to survive long enough to reproduce. So what we do is work like a switch. First we see a bit of information, second we run it down a checklist to identify if it is using trained conman techniques and if any technique is employed we dump entirely and best dump the author for eternity.
I've been trying this technique on Youtube and am getting very good results.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jul 2, 2023 15:39:05 GMT
Right so we need some rules to determine what to lob and what to view. The wrong way here is subjective rules, like a typically fuzzy one would be I will watch it if it looks interesting. We need cast iron objectivity ideally. I'll enumerate some rules I personally use to give you an idea. Indeed as I think of them.
The first one that really is the one that you see contravenes more than any and the best proxy to a positive ID on crap is the invitation to view or read, i.e. the title will typically advertise itself by arousing your curiosity, but leaving it unsatisfied unless you read it. In other words you can not know the real subject of the piece without consuming it.
Another one to throw out is if the title highly exaggerates something, and double bad if you don't know what the something is. A typical title of this kind would be "This will change everything".
A third one to finish with for this post is in the content. If the content contains a definite factual error, e.g. it only takes maybe an encyclopedia to know objectively, then dump immediately. It really is important to strictly dump on error.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jul 3, 2023 13:15:57 GMT
Here's another proxy for low grade and often inaccurate information. It is when it is using emotion to magnify the impact of the presentation. For example a BBC story about how bad covid was would cut to many scenes of crying women designed to engage people's emotional brain. In nearly every one of this category of what is really more like propaganda there will be a combination of mood music, audio effect and the like and some cinematographic tricks. One of the most common is a fast flicking from one frame to the next. There is a certain kind of sweet spot for the propaganda merchant in terms of interval between frame flicks. It is just under the time it takes the conscious mind to assimilate the picture. Anyone playing about with these tricks is essentially lying to you by exploiting psychological traits. Ban yourself completely from viewing of any of this material and take note of the publisher.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jul 4, 2023 10:29:38 GMT
Here's another simple proxy to detect bullshit. When a speaker is in a conference giving a speech, time how long it takes him to get down to business. If it is under 30s you are dealing with someone who may well be a genius. They have so much to cram into the talk they don't hang about. If the speaker reels of a whole load of stuff talking about himself and how he has so many awards and has done so many amazing things which relate little to the subject he is supposed to be talking about then ditch. The danger zone is if the speaker is still introducing himself after 4-5m. 2m should be the maximum.
Oh and one other point related here, this time-wasting stuff can also crop up during the talk as well, but often times a time waster will waste no time in wasting your time and will start doing it straight away!
|
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Jul 8, 2023 14:50:53 GMT
I also like to pay attention to how the speaker explains/conceptuses things. A good presentation has a logical structure to it, it leaves out irrelevant stuff and gives you the bones of the argument or explanation. It does not include irrelevant novelty. If the presentation does it means it is trying to entertain, so you dump if you would rather learn than be entertained. Another thing you can detect is if the speaker is brainwashed. They speak in a manner that makes them sound like members of a cult. Well-rounded people are not the kind who display these attributes. You get it a lot with interviewees on the BBC, like officials from the Pentagon or some government department. They use cult-like expressions. Be aware also of the density of information. If you hear 3-4 sentences and yet nothing has been imparted of value then you have a time waster on your hands trying to hold your attention for as long as possible so you can hear their own ego etc. Fortunately as mentioned before, these types are also detectable by their lengthy intros. I've just banned a channel from Youtube on physics telling me gravity waves with: "This will change everything". It's like the vermin got it out of a "how to do PR for dummies" book.
|
|
