When you disagree with something, or don’t understand something, or feel uncomfortable/hesitant/doubtful, stop reading and post to the Fallible Ideas Discussion Forum. Don’t gloss over problems; bring them up. Don’t pretend you’ll go back and discuss when you get to the end of the book; discuss now. You need to get issues addressed now so that you can take those answers into account while reading the rest. Mistakes will spiral out of control, and destroy the value of reading the rest, if unaddressed.
So wouldn’t my early mistakes destroy my understanding of Popper books? Or was this directed towards people who wouldn’t do a rereading with more analysis? Personally I do think I would benefit a lot from reading your Popper recommendations right now.
I’m writing like this now. I’m spending time thinking, but not much editing. I haven’t been rewriting stuff though. I do often write on the same topic consecutive days in my journal though.
You can go to privacy settings and disable microphone and camera and other stuff for specific apps. I don’t think they would lie like that, they would get sued, right? But maybe it’s an open secret like in Curiosity – Conspiracies Are Often Unnecessary.
So, that is a common problem I’ve seen. I was writing from experience. For example, seemingly intelligent, educated people who are better writers than most have read a book like The Fabric of Reality then later posted opinions on the book’s discussion group like:
FoR doesn’t discuss solipsism. (This belief was entrenched and the guy persisted in the face of evidence such as the lengthy index entry for that topic.)
Popper never said induction is a myth that doesn’t work at all. Obviously he wouldn’t have done that since Popper was smart but that position is stupid. I believe this person had the same opinion about Deutsch. (Again this belief was entrenched. It was highly resistant to arguments and evidence.)
I remember someone on my forum who wasn’t an Objectivist and then read multiple Rand books without discussing them while forming their beliefs about Objectivism. Then they had wild, extensive, entrenched misconceptions about Objectivism. If the result was they dismissed Objectivism it wouldn’t be so bad, but they liked it! I was unable to fix it.
There have been many times where people read a book or essay or they participate in a forum or chat discussion with me and then they comment on something from earlier on, from memory, and it’s not really recognizable as corresponding to any actual text and they won’t go back and find the text and the issue never gets resolved.
Limiting your reading has risks and downsides too so it’s up to you. Ultimately it’s your life and you have to use your own judgment a lot. Figure out some error correction methods that you can use now that work well for you and aren’t too burdensome, and maybe improve them later. Take error correction seriously and do something about it that involves other people sometimes but don’t get hung up with fear.
It feels hard to imagine I would act like that. Due to fallibilism I should take it seriously that I can make such huge mistakes, but I don’t think I would be so intransigent about it.
I think I’ll read lots now without a requirement of any analysis and/or posting here. But maybe I’ll want to post anyway since I’m posting lots of other stuff now.
This is itself an example of the issue I was talking about. I find a lot of times I give some advice, I later find out someone took it in a way I didn’t know about or intend. Like discouraging reading Popper wasn’t my intention.
Right. After some time I realized what was happening and thought there was a problem, but I wasn’t even on the forum then. I should’ve brought it up earlier after joining though. I’ve thought about it sometimes.
The payout is related to a 2019 class action lawsuit that alleged Apple was infringing on its users’ privacy by capturing conversations overheard by its Siri voice assistant without consent, passing the recordings to third-party quality control contractors. Apple offered a formal apology and pledged it would no longer retain user recordings, but pushed back against additional allegations that it allowed advertisers to target consumers based on Siri recording data. In January 2025, the company agreed to pay $95 million out to impacted users to settle the case.
Apparantley they did lie like that, and did get sued. That’s good they got sued.
Do you think the quote says that Apple spied on users? Do you want to analyze the text? Are you relying on information outside the quote? What do you think happened, like what do you think Apple was and wasn’t doing with mics?
I did, when and until I posted it. I noticed shortly after posting it that I had read it wrong. Apple was sued for passing siri recordings onto third-party quality control contractors, without the user’s consent. Not for simply spying and passing recordings on to third-parties. They weren’t sued for spying and pushed back against allegations that they were. I was mistaken.
Why didn’t I point out my mistake right away? Not sure. In future, I’ll try to point out mistakes I notice right away.
