• vga@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    Only the most milquetoast of peoples with perfect online self-control, and opinions that perfectly align with yours should be listened to, yes.

    I’m excited to see which post of mine will be the one.

  • FreshParsnip@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    7 hours ago

    I try to be unbiased when telling anecdotes but ultimately everyone is a little biased. Even if they try not to be, they will be a bit biased to making themselves look good

  • Admetus@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Reminds me of AITA? (am I the asshole?) posts that either felt incredible or just posted as ragebait for farming karma.

  • db2@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    Good luck with that. Half of what I post is made up, I’m not telling you which half or if this comment is one of them.

    If they try to recreate me in AI based on my posts it’s going to be funny af.

  • YappyMonotheist@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Even if they tell you IRL too, have you ever spoken to a split couple? Reality can take very different shapes depending on who’s talking, lol.

  • TheLeadenSea@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    13 hours ago

    Spoiler: every narrator is ‘unreliable’ (ie biased and subjective) - just as every real person is. Everyone sees and spins the same events a different way.

    • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 hours ago

      For example: ICE claims they HAD to shoot Rene Good, because she was a domestic terrorist who was going to run him over.

      And everybody ELSE saw the video and said ICE is full of shit.

      See? Different perspectives.

    • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      That’s the entire point of citation, repeatable experiment, and peer review. The only way we can ever touch at reliability is cross-referential consensus.

      • TheLeadenSea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Of course, consensus doesn’t automatically mean truth if the consensers aren’t all being self interrogative and critically thinking.

  • TranquilTurbulence@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    Can confirm.
    I can’t trust my memory. The big picture is distorted and the details are gone. Who knows what happened two weeks ago, let alone months ago.

    However random little things are stuck in my memory, but that’s because my mind cherry picked them. Nobody else paid attention to the events I considered worth remembering, while I ignored everything other people found interesting. Even when I feel like I remember what happened, who knows how accurate that really is.

    Then there’s the internet posts. Who knows how honestly they were written.

    • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Two weeks ago? Thats easy enough to remember. You woke up, wearing THESE PAJAMAS, then you lifted your head off the pillow at 6:23am local time just in time to see your cats butthole waaaaay too close to your face.

      You showered at 7:02am. Then you ate a bowl of Cherrios with 2% milk, and despite being 42 years old, you ate these Cherrios while crying and watching reruns of Spongebob Squarepants on Paramount Plus.

      At 7:52 you were interupted by a knock at the door. It was a jehovah witness trying to sell you candybars for $5 each for charity to benefit their high school district despite being in his 20s. You didn’t piece together it was a scam until an hour later after he was long gone and you ate the chocolate bar.

      After that at 9:03 you put pants on, when your zoom work meeting reminded you. Despite not being able to see below your waist, they knew you weren’t wearing pants.

      That zoom meeting lasted until 11:30am. You proceeded to watch the second half of the price is right. You know, Drew Carry really isn’t all that bad as host. Plus Bob Barker was a womanizer and abuser. So Carry is probably the better option overall. I’d still like to see Ken Jennings host, but thats because I like absurd comedy.

      After that, at noon you just said “don’t talk to me until I’ve had my coffee”, but the only one who could hear you is your cat Mr MurderMuffins. He was meowing because he wants food, global domination, and scritches around his ears. In that order.

      How hard is it for you to remember the details of your own life??? I remember them just fine just from watching the hidden cameras set up in every room around your home. It’s become the new secret his show of 2026. It’s called “Who wants to watch a million hundredair?”.

      It’s a lot like The Truman Show, but with more crying, nudity, and near endless masturbation in an open bathrobe.

      Seriously though. Go see an expert and get a brain scan. Maybe your memory is failing. Could be developing dementia.

  • adhd_traco@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    13 hours ago
    Documentary suggestions with very deceitful people

    If you wanna see how hard people can be to read, you should check out the documentary Hollywood Con Queen, or Black Swan (2024-2025). In the first it’s about a psychopath, in the second most likely too, and one of the best documentaries I’ve ever watched. The latter is very investigative and quite long.

    I think it’s available on BBC iplayer, but requires an account with UK IP and pinky-promising you pay for your TV license.

    Pretty good preparation to not have to learn the hard way how misleading people can be.

  • sparkles@piefed.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    12 hours ago

    I think there are layers to this. Even irl people will say one thing and end up doing something else. Often with good intentions or at least not nefarious ones. I think people online sometimes take a creative license, which is fine.

    Fediverse being small, I’ve started to recognize some posters by their background stories. If those are online characters or not, I’ll never know. I wonder if it matters? Now, as it pertains to bots passing as people or gofundme scams I get a little annoyed. I haven’t seen too much of that here, but it was disgusting on Reddit/imgur, and getting worse.

    I tend to take online interactions with a grain of salt. I trust my wow guild a bit, but like…I know their dog’s names and stuff.