I think you’re kind of missing the point of the question. Even if I avoid media, other people don’t, so I get exposed to some of these topics anyway. Even if they’re 95% noise, I think it might be worth asking the right people which 95% it is.
All of the topics you raised are distractions from living. That is your answer.
I’m curious if the most epistemically conscientious agree with you, and if so, whether they’ve made the case in explicit detail. Would you happen to be a superforecaster?
You don’t even have to ask anyone else about that, just objectively look at your own life 20 years ago compared to today. Not how worried or hysterical you might feel, or how you feel about ideology or people you’ll never meet, but your day to day life and your prospects for the future.
I’d say about half of the bullet points in the original post pass that test:
The questions about migrations and WFH have implications for lifestyle decisions and investments. The WFH and awokening questions affect what kind of advice I might offer to a graduating high schooler. The misinformation and IRA questions affect how I think about the looting and Biden questions.
We’d all like that but I don’t think it is truly possible.
I think you’re kind of missing the point of the question. Even if I avoid media, other people don’t, so I get exposed to some of these topics anyway. Even if they’re 95% noise, I think it might be worth asking the right people which 95% it is.
I’m curious if the most epistemically conscientious agree with you, and if so, whether they’ve made the case in explicit detail. Would you happen to be a superforecaster?
I’d say about half of the bullet points in the original post pass that test:
The questions about migrations and WFH have implications for lifestyle decisions and investments. The WFH and awokening questions affect what kind of advice I might offer to a graduating high schooler. The misinformation and IRA questions affect how I think about the looting and Biden questions.
This is the genre I am looking for.
-