More to the point, you need to explain how what you call a "crackpot belief" can "turn out to be right." Does "crackpot" mean "irrational," or "unscientific," or "as yet unproven / untested"?
-
-
-
It means "very fringe" + "unproven"
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Seeing this phenomenon described as "epistemic polarization" https://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/conspiracy-theories-politics-infowars-threat-democracy … or "epistemic breakdown" https://democracyjournal.org/alcove/zuck-murdoch-and-crisis-of-epistemic-breakdown/ … Seems pretty accurate, and I agree -- doesn't appear solvable.
-
Just illustrates how dependent we were on third-party filtering mechanisms (for better or worse). Not clear how those get rebuilt in current media environment, or what the new equilibrium looks like.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Not solvable absent some catalyzing event of sufficient magnitude to change the trajectory. The peril of this path must be clearer to more than just a few in order to motivate change. Must go from esoteric to obvious.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.