= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
army1987 comments on Open thread, September 15-21, 2014 - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (339)
Meh. Sufficiently big natural disasters or political events find a way onto my Facebook feed anyway.
Once in a while when I'm bored I check out the Android app of my country's wire service (I think the American equivalent would be the Associated Press) and/or the box in the top right of the English Wikipedia's home page. But it's a rare week that I spend more than half an hour seeking out news deliberately.
I'm not sure how much one should trust the news filter in one's country's wire service.
Trust it for what purposes?
Trust to not be politically biased.
Given the way I use it I don't care whether they're politically unbiased, just whether they're less addictive than blogs and Facebook.
So another voter defects in the rational ignorance collective action problem.
Why would the knowledge of who won the World Cup or how many kids Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie have any relevance at all when deciding whom to vote for?
(I jest, but LeechBlock is going to get me the hell out of here in a minute and a half so I don't have time to write a more serious reply.)