TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Factiness

41 点作者 csantini超过 8 年前

11 条评论

yummyfajitas超过 8 年前
It&#x27;s entertaining to read an article which simultaneously recognizes it&#x27;s sources are deeply wrong about some things, and then <i>immediately</i> parrots information gained from those very same sources:<p><i>It shouldn’t have surprised you that the United States is a deeply racist country. And because that fact is more obvious now, you shouldn’t be surprised what will happen when open bigotry is given even more permission, legitimacy, and empowerment.</i><p>It&#x27;s almost completely impossible to comprehend the possibility that many Trump supporters aren&#x27;t racist, because the very same media that got the election wrong told us it was true.<p>Shocking fact: I know a number of Trump supporters and only one of them is white. White supremacists, all of them? Including the African woman who&#x27;s literally never been in a social setting that was majority white?<p>Shocking fact #2: you probably also know a Trump supporter or two who are simply afraid to tell you.
评论 #12937759 未加载
评论 #12937694 未加载
评论 #12938027 未加载
评论 #12937746 未加载
airesQ超过 8 年前
FiveThirtyEight did not dismiss Trump, in fact it kept saying that Trump had a very real chance of winning. The last prediction was a 29%, and a 29% chance is quite a lot. If you interpret a 29% chance as &#x27;dismissing&#x27; then you are misreading the numbers, and besides the numbers, they never said&#x2F;wrote that Clinton was anywhere close to a sure thing.<p>Regarding election day coverage, 538 did report that some districts in Florida were doing very well for Clinton, compared with 2012. But they quickly reminded people that this could just mean that the votes were distributed differently.
评论 #12937880 未加载
评论 #12937762 未加载
评论 #12937732 未加载
评论 #12937928 未加载
rhapsodic超过 8 年前
<i>&quot;As I type this, Trump’s crowd is chanting for Clinton to be jailed. It’s horrifying.&quot;</i><p>What is horrifying to me is the prospect of living under a government that is not bound by its own laws. It&#x27;s fairly obvious that Clinton knowingly broke the law, despite others advising her not to. There are people in prison &quot;as I type this&quot; for similar, but far less serious offenses. Why should Clinton be above the law?
评论 #12938115 未加载
sambe超过 8 年前
Nate Silver made a rather good analysis of his own failings with respect to the primary: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;fivethirtyeight.com&#x2F;features&#x2F;how-i-acted-like-a-pundit-and-screwed-up-on-donald-trump&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;fivethirtyeight.com&#x2F;features&#x2F;how-i-acted-like-a-pundi...</a>.<p>I agree substantially more with his own analysis than I do with this blog post. He even mentions that the introspection may have gone too far. Why is it that Trump&#x27;s victory has been seen as a &quot;another failure of the pollsters&quot;? Fivethiryeight had him at 35% chance. Betting markets were at around 4.1 the day before IIRC. In my view it&#x27;s just another narrative to sell to people - laughing at other &quot;stupid&quot; people, here, read our newspaper instead.
评论 #12937723 未加载
matt4077超过 8 年前
I much prefer Richard Feynman&#x27;s term of &quot;cargo-cult science&quot; for what is basically the same idea.<p>But I think it&#x27;s misguided to apply it to this situation. 538 had Trump at a chance of 1&#x2F;3 on election day. Not because there were any polls that pointed at a possible Trump win, but because their model was excellent enough to detect the uncertainty in the polls (mostly the high number of undecideds and volatility).<p>Regarding the &quot;mainstream Media&quot; I fail to see what they did wrong. They showed Trump for what he is (after some hesitation). We now know that 30% of Americans are willing to throw millions of people under the bus, either because they&#x27;re racists, or because they&#x27;re willing to empower racism and an assortment of other hate just because some caricature of an imagined &quot;coastal liberal&quot; made fun of them. Another 50% can&#x27;t be bothered to vote at all. Are people expecting the media to take its clues from these voters and triangulate their morals? Luckily, minority rights aren&#x27;t actually subject to popular approval, even in a democracy.
评论 #12938479 未加载
评论 #12938026 未加载
评论 #12940117 未加载
bryanlarsen超过 8 年前
What an excellent word. &quot;thruthiness&quot; is an awesome word to describe what&#x27;s happening out there now, so &quot;factiness&quot; as its corollary should also join the popular lexicon.<p>However, &quot;factiness&quot; as a concept has been recognized for much longer. The most popular expression expressing it would be the quote that Twain attributes to Disraeli: &quot;lies, damned lies and statistics&quot;.<p>Thruthiness probably grew up as an antidote to factiness. Proper math education and recognition that most preliminary scientific studies are bullshit is probably a better antidote, but trusting your gut is an easier antidote, and often effective. It&#x27;s just that when your gut is wrong, relying on your gut makes it almost impossible to change your mind.
hunvreus超过 8 年前
The author is assuming media have a sacred mission of objectively informing us. Media ethics haven&#x27;t been honored in a long time, if ever.<p>If the Second Amendment is the last line of defense against tyranny, a skeptic and inquisitive mind is the first and most important one.
partisan超过 8 年前
Nowadays you can have reality your way with relatively little work. In fact, you have to work hard to get other perspectives. You can even lie to yourself about your own viewpoint. You could be a left leaning liberal ready to say all of the right things on all of the right topics and then feel uncomfortable when a person of color enters the room. Or joke with your friends in &quot;Ebonics&quot; when everyone in the room looks the same. Ever done a triple take when an interracial couple sits near you at a restaurant? I see it all of the time.<p>This country is out of touch with itself and we are out of touch with ourselves. We worry about what others think of our opinions and bury the parts of us that don&#x27;t align with the right opinions. But they stay there, latent until they are triggered by something that is outside of the script that we prepared for. As one of my friends put it, &quot;I&#x27;d rather know who is racist than not know and have people pretend they are not&quot;. It starts there. By knowing who we are and who others are. By being honest with ourselves. And then looking outside of the bubble we created for ourselves and understanding the other perspectives that exist and why they exist.<p>Personally, I listen to a wide range of podcasts from far left to far right. I am uncomfortable with the intolerance I hear on both sides of the spectrum but I would rather know what the perspectives are than not know and be surprised and completely unable to understand when someone like Trump wins.
ecnmic超过 8 年前
I don&#x27;t understand what this article is saying?
评论 #12937721 未加载
评论 #12937701 未加载
评论 #12937679 未加载
评论 #12937699 未加载
fagnerbrack超过 8 年前
My theory is that everybody thought Trump winning was so &quot;out of reality&quot; that they just didn&#x27;t care in doing the count right.<p>I was keeping tracking in the NYT real-time dashboard and all started 80&#x2F;20 for Hilary and then it suddenly changed 80&#x2F;20 to Trump (I guess Pareto is happy with that).
carsongross超过 8 年前
Smart people find very elaborate and clever ways to be wrong.