I should probably admit that my planned behavior for #4 is mostly hubris, and as such I forgive you your shadenfreude. I deserve what I get (including the sweet sweet knowledge, of course).
But this hubris _is_ based on additional assumptions and knowledge about the universe, including a fair bit about infohazards and “psychological damage”, which make me believe the threat is much less than stated. This is a different aspect of the problematic thesis under consideration: these examples are incredibly lacking in information that would allow one to judge the quantity of truth achievable for what amount of risk.
I should probably admit that my planned behavior for #4 is mostly hubris, and as such I forgive you your shadenfreude. I deserve what I get (including the sweet sweet knowledge, of course).
But this hubris _is_ based on additional assumptions and knowledge about the universe, including a fair bit about infohazards and “psychological damage”, which make me believe the threat is much less than stated. This is a different aspect of the problematic thesis under consideration: these examples are incredibly lacking in information that would allow one to judge the quantity of truth achievable for what amount of risk.