Passing information on to to other people is fine. However, in this case, why forwarding? If you are convinced by the information, why not do an effort and post it yourself in the group?
I found this extract summarizing well Author's POV "This means that while groups can generate high levels of solidarity, which can in principle be put to powerful political effect, it also becomes harder to express disagreement within the group. If, for example, an outspoken and popular member of a neighbourhood WhatsApp group begins to circulate misinformation about health risks, the general urge to maintain solidarity means that their messages are likely to be met with approval and thanks. When a claim or piece of content shows up in a group, there may be many members who view it as dubious; the question is whether they have the confidence to say as much. Meanwhile, the less sceptical can simply forward it on. It’s not hard, then, to understand why WhatsApp is a powerful distributor of “fake news” and conspiracy theories."
> Passing information on to to other people is fine. However, in this case, why forwarding? If you are convinced by the information, why not do an effort and post it yourself in the group?
If you are convinced by a presentation of some information that someone else has already done, why go to all the trouble of doing your own presentation of the same information, when you can just point to what has already been done? I don't see how that isn't part of free expression. Free expression doesn't mean you have to re-say everything yourself at tedious length.
Basically the author is complaining that when people have free expression, some of the things they freely express will be false. Yes, that's correct. Welcome to the real world.
I am really curious to learn from HN community their thought about the following statement
"“There's been this belief that if you do an MBA or other forms of management training, then that means you're [automatically] a good manager, but all of our evidence shows that that's absolutely not the case,” says Goodall. In healthcare, for instance, “a lot of people think we should let the doctors do the medicine and let the managers run the hospitals, but the research shows that actually that's wrong. You need doctors to lead other doctors, because they understand what they need in terms of being an employee.”
> "There's been this belief that if you do an MBA or other forms of management training, then that means you're [automatically] a good manager, but all of our evidence shows that that's absolutely not the case,"
as an mba holder myself, i can only say what i know, but i went in there with the explicit knowledge that im going to be learning the tools of business and management (statistics, accouting/book keeping, finance, marketing, strategy, management control etc) and that to be a real manager you have to be experienced actually managing things (and learn what works and fails, how people are really motivated etc)
i guess if some people go into mba programs expecting to be managers or able to manage people right from the start, they are very likely to be in for a rude awakening
maybe i live in a bubble, but do people actually expect that just getting an mba = compitent manager??
Extract from the article
"But why print the money on wood? Why not just give residents $300 worth of federal dollars?
The answer is simple: By creating its own local currency, Tenino keeps the money in the community. As Fournier puts it, “Amazon will not be accepting wooden dollars.”
“The money stays in the city. It doesn’t go out to Walmart and Costco and all those places,” says Joyce Worrell, who has run the antique shop Iron Works Boutiques for the past decade.
The article is very clear about this. The store can take the currency to the town government and redeem it for USD. They can then use that USD for restocking.
The goal isn't some circulating currency: it's just a stimulus that has to be spent locally.
The article explains this. The business can convert the local notes to cash on a regular basis. The point is to give those in need a cash substitute that enables purchasing essentials locally. Seems like a great idea to me!
I was thinking since a couple of months on the idea of building a simulator that simulate a day live without as social platform like FB. A kind of: simulate people interactions where FB is shut down for, lets say for one day.
I found this extract summarizing well Author's POV "This means that while groups can generate high levels of solidarity, which can in principle be put to powerful political effect, it also becomes harder to express disagreement within the group. If, for example, an outspoken and popular member of a neighbourhood WhatsApp group begins to circulate misinformation about health risks, the general urge to maintain solidarity means that their messages are likely to be met with approval and thanks. When a claim or piece of content shows up in a group, there may be many members who view it as dubious; the question is whether they have the confidence to say as much. Meanwhile, the less sceptical can simply forward it on. It’s not hard, then, to understand why WhatsApp is a powerful distributor of “fake news” and conspiracy theories."