Many of the 'theories' in the post seem made up and extremely subjective and yet they're presented as if they're facts.
Kinda interesting, maybe we should call this The Substack Effect, anything on a reputable platform will likely to be perceived as the truth even if it's not.
I did, and I couldn’t tell if the intention was to be really meta, or what. It felt like half the list was just made up bullshit (especially with the sources the person chose, with which I was mostly unfamiliar, and thus, I interpret as being less reliable than sources I know and trust), and then at the end he says, “don’t trust any of this.” Like, was the intention to introduce us to useful concepts, or is it some kind of thought experiment around how people take in information, and how revealing the trick doesn’t change people’s perceptions? Was the whole article a kayfabe display?
I don’t like this kind of article very much. It feels like a waste of time. I mentally throw out everything I read except a couple things I searched independently. Maybe that’s a good thing. I don’t know. It feels like a waste of time, either way.
> Politics is pro-wrestling in suits. Opposing parties are collaborators in a
> greater system, whose choreographed conflict entertains and distracts us
> from what is really going on.
Among Trump's laundry list of sins has been engaging in banal kayfabe[1] while in office. Ds and Rs are supposed to be far more refined in their approach to putting on a show for the masses while defrauding them.
Did you link to the wiki because some people may not read the article and understand what kayfabe is, or was there a specific section you intended to reference?
Why would anyone *prefer* reading on Twitter? Of all the crazy ideas I’ve seen on the internet, this may be the craziest of them all: that someone enjoys Twitter’s UI for long-form content.
I’ve read a million blog posts with useful mental frameworks. Finding a way to apply what I’ve read to real situations in my life is an ongoing struggle.
Kinda interesting, maybe we should call this The Substack Effect, anything on a reputable platform will likely to be perceived as the truth even if it's not.