If it wasn't in an encyclopedia, you just trusted word of mouth. : whitepeopletwitter

[-] AFKBRBChocolate@lemmy.world 73 points 11 months ago

It's funny - almost as much stuff was knowable, but we couldn't be bothered to get the info. I mentioned in a different thread recently that, today, if you're with a group of friends and someone asks what a platypus eats, someone will whip out their phone and answer in 30 seconds. When I was a teen in that same situation, we for sure could have ridden our bikes to the library to find out, but a question like that just wasn't important enough. If someone suggested going to the library to look it up, we'd laugh at them. There were gobs of things like this that, if no one in the group knew the answer, we'd just shrug and move on.

They eat worms, larvae, shrimp, and crayfish, by the way.

[-] ArmoredThirteen@lemmy.ml 16 points 11 months ago

I'd say 9/10 times when someone looks something up that we wouldn't have gone out of our way to find out, that info is instantly lost anyway. I'm way more likely to remember something if I have to go hunt down the info, either at a library or something really obscure that takes work to find online

[-] dfc09@lemmy.world 24 points 11 months ago

That's my superpower, I remember that shit. It'll occasionally come up in conversation where suddenly I look like a genius about some obscure topic and everybody asks "how the fuck do you know that" and all I can say is "see... I looked it up once 4 years ago..."

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] hswolf@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago

the best part about that is that everyone would start discussing the actual answer for dozens of minutes, without reaching any conclusion or the one that looks more fun

[-] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 54 points 11 months ago

You would consult the ancient technology of books. And there were these people who's sole job was to direct you towards the books that contained the information you needed.

There were these huge buildings just filled to the brim with different types of books.

Just because the internet has a huge quantity of information doesn't mean the quality has increased.

[-] rosymind@leminal.space 29 points 11 months ago

It boggles my mind how younger people think we lived in some kind of dark-age before google.

Not only did books exist, but they could give you an in-depth answer that could be trusted.

And yes, when the internet was made public, I loved being able to find answers more quickly, but I didn't just walk around with empty space between my ears

If anything, I feel like people are more gullible and believe more falsehoods than they did when I was a teen

(That said... there is plenty of information that's been updated, and plenty of stupid shit that went around- like the falsehood that we only have five senses, or that we only use 10% of our brains)

[-] Robust_Mirror@aussie.zone 11 points 11 months ago

I had a teacher in high school tell us that glass is an incredibly slow moving liquid, and that's why on really old buildings the glass is thicker at the bottom, because it has flowed and "pooled" like that.

I believed that for a good number of years and even repeated it a few times before finding out that no, it's not, and the reason some old glass is like that is simply because of the manufacturing process at the time, and that it was simply installed thick side down for aesthetic reasons, and that you can actually find old glass that is thicker at the side or top because it was installed differently.

[-] rosymind@leminal.space 16 points 11 months ago

I remember that one! What about how people thought we could only taste certain flavors with specific parts of our tongues.

That one really confused me as a kid

[-] ezures@lemmy.wtf 7 points 11 months ago

The taste bud thing is even worse. There are zones of buds which specialize in certain tastes, but they are scattered around the whole tongue. The brain know their pattern and recognize them as you are tasting something.

Thought Emporium made a video about faking taste and between 5-11 he explains in depth.

[-] Klear@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago

Don't get me started on the 5% of our brains thing. Utter bullshit. There's no way I'm reaching even close to that number.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] jaybone@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago

When teachers didn’t know the answer to a question, they would just make some stupid shit up.

Which ironically I guess is just what AI does.

[-] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 5 points 11 months ago

It's actually on this list

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_misconceptions

Fun article

[-] CurlyMoustache@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago

I think the gullability of humans have been constant throughout our history. The difference now is that everyone has a way to broadcast their stupidity easier now than before.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] trolololol@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago

I was there before Internet and I do think libraries are dark ages compared to Internet

And people always blindly trusted books and scientific articles. Including that one article that says that vaccines causes autism.

People were and are gullible. What changes is for efficiently being able to tailor lies to specific groups.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

Why are you guys acting like books no longer exist? Libraries are full of them. And kids still go to them.

[-] ElBarto@sh.itjust.works 42 points 11 months ago

Everything I learned from older people as a kid is the reason why I fact check everything anyone tells me now.

[-] problematicPanther@lemmy.world 41 points 11 months ago

but there are also misconceptions that the internet also teaches us. For example, we are taught that planes fly by using Bernoulli's law, that is, the shape of the wing causes lift to be generated. I can confidently say, after years of studying in aeronautical sciences at university, that the real reason planes fly is magic.

[-] Klear@lemmy.world 9 points 11 months ago

Aunt Marge was right!

[-] Spendrill@lemm.ee 9 points 11 months ago

You just caused my to cackle 'heeheeheehee' like a mad scientist's demented servant so thanks for that!

[-] Anticorp@lemmy.ml 31 points 11 months ago

False! My mother bought us an encyclopedia set, and I read that shit cover to cover, A-Z! We also had these things called schools, and these big buildings called libraries.

[-] merc@sh.itjust.works 27 points 11 months ago

Encyclopedias exited, and if you wanted to know the population of Greece they were perfect. But, they were terrible for answering random questions like "Why is the sky blue?" The answer was almost certainly in the encyclopedia, but you'd have to know to look up "Raleigh Scattering", and how would you know that?

What makes modern web searching so good is that it's amazing at surfacing answers to just about any question. Whether the answer it brings up is true is another matter...

[-] Anticorp@lemmy.ml 9 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

The section about the sky would mention it, so then you go to the index in the R book, find the entry for that phenomenon, and read about Raleigh Scattering. The internet is definitely easier for finding random information though, although it's harder now than it was like 10 years ago. ChatGPT is amazing for finding random information, but you have to verify what it tells you, since it will just randomly lie for no reason.

[-] merc@sh.itjust.works 5 points 11 months ago

It doesn't "lie" though, it just generates a plausible sequence of words. The sort-of fortunate thing is that facts are often plausible, and it's going to be trained on a lot of facts. But, facts aren't the only word-sequences that are plausible, and LLMs are trained to be creative, and that means sometimes choosing a next-word that isn't the best fit, which might end up meaning the generated sentence isn't factual.

Calling it a "lie" suggests that it knows the truth, or that it is being deceptive. But, that's giving "spicy autocomplete" too much credit. It simply generates word salads that may or may not contain truths.

load more comments (6 replies)

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (8 replies)

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] Louisoix@lemm.ee 30 points 11 months ago

In the first grade I got curious about negative numbers in my calculator. The teacher told me it was a mistake and I shouldn't play with it.

[-] psud@aussie.zone 6 points 11 months ago

Teacher should have shown you how a number line extends forever in both directions (no reason to think she should have known about imaginary numbers making it extend orthogonally as well)

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] Knusper@feddit.de 23 points 11 months ago

I find this idea genuinely terrifying. Having seen lots of factual information, you start to see where things logically fit in and you're able to deduce so much more new information, but you're also just able to tell when aunt Marge is spitting straight horseshit again.

Now imagine growing up in e.g. a creationist household, maybe even home-schooled, where you're told things just are a certain way, even though it makes absolutely no fucking sense. At no point, you start to see logical patterns. At no point, you develop an intuition for new information. And if someone bullshits you, your only 'defense' is whether you trust them on a personal level, meaning aunt Marge's horseshit is to be considered unquestionably correct. What a dismal and vulnerable position to be in.

[-] linearchaos@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

My neighbor mentioned at the bus stop that grape ice cream is not found because it's illegal due to its toxicity to dogs.

He's a resident doctor.....

[-] smeg@feddit.uk 5 points 11 months ago

At least he's not a vet

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] MistakenBear32@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 points 11 months ago

I had a set of encyclopedias before the internet... They were 20 years older than me though and it wasn't until I was at least 10 or so probably before I started consulting them for school... Lol

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 16 points 11 months ago

Yep. I was in elementary school in the 80s, so, of course, all of their encyclopedias were from the early 70s and had all kinds of out-of-date information.

Wikipedia may be untrustworthy at times, but at least they try to keep things up to date if there's a major change- like a country no longer exists- the encyclopedias and our globe both showed Vietnam as a divided country.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] the_q@lemmy.world 23 points 11 months ago

You'd be surprised at how much misinformation was taught in public schools in the 80s and 90s in Alabama.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago

I'm in Indiana and have a 13-year-old daughter. You'd be surprised how much misinformation is taught in public schools now. Not just the abstinence-only sex education bullshit and the same old lies about drugs, but just getting basic history wrong because that history makes America look bad. I do my best to educate her on all of these and other subjects where school has failed her, but I have no experience in pedagogy, so it's an uphill battle.

She did enjoy coming home every day to tell me new lies the anti-drug program in her health class told her so I would correct them.

[-] fakeman_pretendname@feddit.uk 7 points 11 months ago

I stopped to think about this for a second and I am not surprised.

[-] CrowAirbrush@lemm.ee 19 points 11 months ago

I wouldn't only carry that misinformation but actively spread it like we just discovered a new jesus.

Now i let the internet take care of it and live my own happy life while people worry about wrong info online.

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] problematicPanther@lemmy.world 18 points 11 months ago

we used to think that glass is actually a slowly flowing liquid.

[-] WaxedWookie@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago

Opinions seem to vary, but Scientific American is credible enough, right? https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-glass-really-a-liquid/

[-] RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago

Is...that not true?

[-] PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works 7 points 11 months ago

It's not. Part of the myth comes from ol timey glaziers putting glass fat side down.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] fluxion@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago

Then eventually you post it on the internet after your grandkid shows you how to make a Facebook account

[-] paysrenttobirds@sh.itjust.works 6 points 11 months ago

Yeah I feel like the only difference is now you can find a dozen Marges all copying the same "facts"

[-] teft@startrek.website 11 points 11 months ago

There was also those in between few years where we Encarta’ed everything.

[-] tiredofsametab@kbin.social 7 points 11 months ago

I mean, some houses had encyclopedias before this as well. The problem with those is they got outdated quickly for anything current and near past and were expensive. Occasionally, a big archaeology find could shake up a section as well.

load more comments (3 replies)

[-] SirStumps@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

The library. We read books.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] Sarsaparilla@kbin.social 6 points 11 months ago

We also had libraries.

load more comments (3 replies)

[-] ivanafterall@kbin.social 6 points 11 months ago

Did you guys know that Marilyn Manson played Paul on the Wonder Years?

RIP Mark Paul Gosselaar.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] mondo_brondo@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

It’s no different today. There’s plenty of misinformation all over the internet.

[-] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 11 points 11 months ago

It's very different today. People have learned to get rich selling misinformation to morons. At least you knew Aunt Marge probably didn't have a complete understanding of whatever she was telling you.

[-] mondo_brondo@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

People have gotten rich selling bullshit for a long time. The term “snake oil salesmen” is not new.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] Rhaedas@kbin.social 8 points 11 months ago

The internet is like having hundreds or more relatives, not just the one aunt giving you the single viewpoint, and some of those relatives can explain their points better or have actual evidence to convince, unlike Marge who just says she wouldn't lie to you. Which ones are right? It's up to you in how you determine that. Maybe some are so trustworthy in past subjects that you can take what they say at face value. Maybe it's a matter of how many agree, or what you hear from them when they argue with each other. None of them may be right...you might have to form your own opinion.

People Twitter