And now instead of Marge, it’s ChatGPT.
post
If you had a question that nobody could answer, you’d go down to the library, open up a drawer with a bunch of note cards in it, look to see if any of the note cards had a word about a concept you wanted to learn about, hope that the card existed, was in the right place, and listed a book that would actually give you the information you wanted.
Or you wouldn't go through the effort, you'd ask a trusted elder or a friend, they would lie to you, and you'd peddle that misinformation for decades while refusing that you might be wrong. Guess which one was more likely
The first step would be opening an encyclopedia. A lot of households actually had an encyclopedia on their shelves for this very reason. Something which these "pre-internet" rumination threads always seems to neglect.
Honestly I only ever knew one household with an encyclopedia set, I’m sure it depends on the location but where I lived that was more of an upper middle class thing.
I still have an encyclopaedia on my shelf. I have to admit it’s the small edition though.
I also still have a bunch of dictionaries (different languages), and a very outdated atlas.
And also the books surrounding that book
Now instead of your aunt coming at you with misinfo she learned from her aunt, it's your aunt coming at you with misinformation she learned from a russian bot farm.
But at least you can counter it with misinformation from an AI bot :D
I have the opposite problem. My mother doesn't believe anything I tell her and thinks it is misinformation that I've been fed.
Yes and to make it even worse, your aunt back in the day would tell 10 people some BS and maybe 3 would believe her. Not some Russian bot factory spits out BS to 10 million people and a lot more believe it.
Did you spray for Russians under your bed before going to sleep? You really should, and check behind the sofa and in the dryer too. Russians can disguise themselves as Bounce dryer sheets, and the latest Russians can send themselves over Ethernet using the RoE protocol: Russian over Ethernet.
Russia! Quite an imaginary world you live in! Aunts and Russians and bots and misinformation and all these people targeting you! How exciting!
Can I send you my Moral Rearmament and John Birch Society fliers?
I'm oddly honored that I got a 3 paragraph troll with pictures in response to a comment that was barely even about russia.
GOOD point.
The well documented Russian troll networks simply do not exist.
Yep. The mark of a stupid Westerner is how much they blame Russia for their country's problems (the exception being Ukraine obviously). Meanwhile the US literally has a billion+ dollar anti-China propaganda budget (taxpayer funded) and a decentralized, private network of pro-Israel propagandists backed by the richest people in the country, buying up entire media companies for that purpose.
You went to a library and read a couple of encyclopedias.
I had a fantastic working class education at the local library and our home encyclopedia. I definitely carry around 40 year old random factoids and such just like everybody else, but I still love researching things to this day.
I remember that one time when I was around eight, a neighbor put the entire 1976 World Book encyclopedia at the end of his driveway. I ran home, grabbed a wheelbarrow and carted that knowledge back to my house. It was about twenty years out of date at the time but still the basic concepts were valid enough that I kept referring to it until I left for university.
Glad AI is finally taking us back to an era of disinformation
Yeah, I haven't really seen a huge shift in the volume of misinformation. Sure, the topics and delivery methods have changed, but it has been a firehose this entire time.
The volume has increased exponentially. With generative AI, there are thousands of "news" sites with landing pages that look better than many real local news organizations.
These sites have agendas and are able to post the same story across the web, written differently each time, to look like events are taking place across the country/world and all being reported on by local news orgs. It's all astroturf, as far as the eye can see.
This list from Wikipedia just barely scratches the surface: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fake_news_websites
And this doesn't even touch on the amount of bullshit real news orgs publish without proper investigation thanks to the 24 hour news cycle and the rush to be the first to cover a story.
Yeah, there used to be misinformation published by news organizations and people with agendas. But that used to take significant effort. Now, I can set up a fake news website and fill it with stories in an afternoon.
There were tons of misinformation sites in place the moment the web existed. I was there, 6,000 years ago...
Seriously though, Fox News and all the other Murdoch owned media has been a firehouse for decades. Magazines and print media like the Weekly World News as well. On the internet the misinformation spreader set up shop early, and it was mainly the search engines that directed people to the better sources.
The main change is that the people are choosing to consume the firehose of social media.
This is actually a pretty interesting topic.
I was born in 1982 and we didn’t get the internet until 1998. Which means I was a kid and teen in a mostly analog world.
Your day to day knowledge was formed by things you were taught in school, the things you saw on the news and the people you were surrounded by. That gave you a fairly broad understanding of the world.
If you really NEEDED a correct answer, you’d use an encyclopedia at school or the library, or any specific book on the topic. But you had to be motivated to do that. And even those resources might be limited in scope or unavailable. My local library in the Netherlands would’ve had some books on US history for example, but you wouldn’t really find say, a biography of Jimmy Carter. So at some point, you’d reach the maximum depth of knowledge to be gained in your particular situation.
The internet really helps us drill down way, WAY deeper than what we could find in the 80’s and 90’s. I can now have in-depth knowledge on the most obscure topic and drill down as far as I want.
It’s unfortunate that a lot of people don’t use the web for that. Or end up actually misinformed because of it.
My high school in NZ was pretty poor, so even in the early 00s, we still had Cold War-era maps of Europe in textbooks and on the wall, and no access to the internet (computers were taught to us as glorified typewriters). It took until I was older than I care to admit to learn that Czechoslovakia was no longer a thing.
When I graduated HS, the map on the wall in our history class still had "French West Africa" on it (textbooks were at least more up to date :-)) "French West Africa" hadn't existed for . . . looks it up . . . about a quarter century before then.
Damn, before I was even born!
Even as a kid I thought that was stupid. If blood is blue in the body and only turns red when it touches oxygen, then why is it red in the water?
I was told that's only in the movies. In real life it would be blue.
But then again I got a detention for arguing that the moon is visible during the day. The detention was because I pointed out to the window and said look, and she was embarrassed.
The detention was because … she was embarrassed.
Ohh yes, classic detention for proving the teacher wrong. There’s a depressing amount of teachers who rule by their ego instead of by science. It’s why I now consider my school discipline record as a source of pride instead of shame.
That's wild to me cos like... We didn't need internet to tell us this was incorrect.
It's not like it doesn't have some logic to it. Blood carries oxygen throughout the body and then cycles back through the lungs to get more oxygen. So when you look at your arms and see the blue veins we just thought that was obviously the deoxygenated blood returning to the heart.
It made basic sense, so no one was running down to the library to check out a medical textbook to disprove it.
Ever see a blood draw? Blood comes out of a vein, into a non-O2 environment.
I think we just don't do as much critical introspection as we like to think. Its easier to imagine maybe there was a tiny amount of O2 or something than that the thing we were taught was entirely false.
I think we just don’t do as much critical introspection as we like to think.
It's definitely true, and it shows that the stuff you learn as kids is even more ingrained than we even notice most of the time. Kids don't normally have blood drawn, so it's not like elementary schools were filled with a bunch of kids saying "wait a minute, that didn't happen with my last blood draw."
You look when they draw blood?
My first thought was how ears and noses look red when sunlight shines through them. If blood was blue, wouldn't they be blue or purple?
This is why encyclopedia salesmen was even a thing.
If you didn't have that, go to a library.
Eventually there was encyclopedia britannica which was basically one of the coolest things you could have for free on your computer in that era.
Funnily even the usage was pretty similar to doom-browsing Wikipedia:
- pick a volume
- open random page
- read about medieval remedies for mental illnesses
- open another random page
- read about some rare tropical bird
- repeat and rinse
- maybe brag about your tidbit knowledge to your friends later (if you had any)
Whenever I would ask a question I would be told to go look it up. I was never sure if I was surrounded by people who didn't know anything or if they just wanted to get me out of the house by sending me to the library for a few hours.
And there was a friend's older brother or cousin, who said some unbelievable horseshit, you thought was true for many years. And you didn't even ask.
Joe Rogan
Actually fucking Joe Rogan is the perfect analogy, he just has random people on that say some stuff to him and he is like damn that's crazy and doesn't even fact check it, and then what he likes he carries forward with him and what he doesn't like hearing just ignores
We got misinformed at a much slower rate though. The newspapers could only tell us so many lies at a time.
Doesn't misinformation involve intent? Aunt Marge probably thought she was right.
no, thats disinformation. disinformation is willful malicious intent to spread misinformation, knowing that its wrong info in order to achieve a certain result(such as propaganda by russia, or giving wrong intel to an enemy). misinfo is just saying potential info that may or may not be true, and no fact checking, and just ignorant to the info.
The reporters who propagated lies about WMDs in Iraq or beheaded babies in Israel probably think they're telling the truth or something close.
It's better than what we have now though, which is going "I think elephants are actually seals that got lost on the way to the south pole" and then going on the internet and searching until you find exactly what you already believe, and then forming a social group around that, then voting in politicians who think that until that stupid belief becomes mainstream and there are politicians debating in congress whether to invade Kenya to transport all the elephants to Antarctica.
I had people arguing with me about blue blood long after the internet was available to everyone. I wouldn't ever tell them they were stupid, but I would say, "I don't think that's right" and they would usually say they learned it in biology or a science class in high school and I would say, "that still doesn't sound right. We should look that up later when get home to our computers" and then They would look at me like I was the idiot for suggesting they were misinformed in school... because you know... school teachers NEVER misinform their students... like ever 🙄
Speaking of misinforming your students; shout out to Miss O'Leary for saying Russia could Invade Canada with Tanks because we were landlocked during the colder months via the arctic.
Fuuuuck. I need to have a look online. I still thought that was true.
45 - UK - sometimes acts like an adult. Obviously has a lot of garbage stuck in my brain.
Edit. FUCK. Yup, not blue. Optical illusion.
Speaking of misinforming your students; shout out to Miss O’Leary for saying Russia could Invade Canada with Tanks because we were landlocked during the colder months via the arctic.
For anyone wondering, no it doesn't freeze over in winter but there are chunks of ice you can hop across that might eventually get you to the firmer ice along the respective shores:
https://angusadventures.com/adventurer-handbook/beringstrait/
Regarding to the diamond ring thing: Most "old traditions" or "old traditional things" aren't actually old at all. In most cases, something that has been done for longer than you are alive counts as "old tradition", because we don't experience the past through history books and facts, but through our experience and through what adults told us when we grew up.
There have definitely been studies linking breakfast to various positive lifestyle outcomes, but that doesn't mean you need 9 grapefruits and 4 bowls of kelloggs flakes. I don't eat breakfast much myself but most of what I've run across has shown that it's beneficial.
Fun fact: You can still order a current print volume of World Book Encyclopedia for the low price of $1,349.00

My parents got me this set of the Childcraft children’s encyclopaedias when I was like 6? I inhaled those things for knowledge back in the pre-internet days!
Am considering getting one for my own kiddo when they get old enough, but like most things from my childhood - they look to have been discontinued.
Honestly surprisingly inexpensive given that about what a set of encyclopedias would cost you 35+ years ago. Not sure about World Book specifically but I know Britannicas were over $1k in 1990 because I remember a door-to-door salesmen trying to sell them to me. Can't imagine anyone other than a library buying these now, and even there they're probably all collecting dust.
shit I still remember a primary school classmate explaining to me:
one sneeze is from dust
two sneezes in quick succession are from cold
three sneezes in quick succession are from allergies
It's been 30+ years, someone pls remove this nonsense from my brain 😩
four sneezes means someone's thinking of you
five sneezes means someone's cutting peppers
six sneezes is anthrax
seven sneezes is the absolute physical maximum
Eight sneezes is instant death.
Common misconception. Actually 7.99999... is instant death.
You can't reach 8.
Nine sneezes means you are in Hell, unfortunately. You have already been dead this whole time, and your torture for this moment of eternity has been temporary amnesia and experiencing the sudden terror of realizing you are sneezing yourself to death. That price of darkness can be a rascal like that.
I had a professor that gave a student $100 for reaching 7 sneezes. His previous student record was 6.
I saw a video of a dog sneezing 30 times in a row
Edit: found it! Glorious video of dogs sneezing https://youtube.com/shorts/4UoFDUbWFHQ
I've never heard of that, but I've kind of used it for children. If it's winter and you hear you kid sneeze, do not worry. If they sneeze again, they are probably barefoot some something, go check on them. 3 times they are either already sick, or allergies

top 83 comments