[2bitencryption]

Not saying it's not accurate, but if you want to debunk a news publication, I think a more reliable source is needed than some guy on Twitter...

"The claims in that news publication were totally fake and deserve to be censored -- here, check out this Twitter user who has the real truth!"

In other words, when debunking an article as true/false, I think extra rigor needs to be put into the debunking -- you can't debunk an unreliable source with yet another unreliable source... (unless this guy is like a NYT editor and I just don't realize it)

[ardy42]

> Not saying it's not accurate, but if you want to debunk a news publication, I think a more reliable source is needed than some guy on Twitter...

It really depends on the news publication's reputation. The New York Post (the original source) is a tabloid and (for instance) Wikipedia does not consider it reliable, so there's not a lot of reason to trust it too highly:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Per...:

> There is consensus that the New York Post is generally unreliable. A tabloid newspaper, editors criticise its lack of concern for fact-checking or corrections, including a number of examples of outright fabrication.

Also I think anyone can credibly point out inconsistencies and highlight the implausibility of certain statements, like the twitter thread does, because those can be easily evaluated. It'd be much harder to take grant the same credibility to a random person's statement that some specific other thing happened.

[elevenoh]

Agree.. It looks to me like 95%+ of those commenting on this in tech circles haven't actually read the NY Post article.

[iaw]

The twitter user is making a rational argument about the claims in the tabloid article. The twitter users claims are demonstrably true. There is no trust involved in understanding the twitter users thesis.

There are oodles of trust involved when you trust a tabloid.

[mistermann]

I am deeply distrustful of the media, but if the claims in this Twitter thread are actually true, then this story sounds like a total farce. But if you're going to frame someone, why would you do it in such a batshit insane way? Bizarre.

If these claims are true, surely some journalist would have noticed the same things? Maybe they have and I completely missed the story?

Edit: after reading the post article, there are quite a number of things that aren't so easily explained away by the oddities pointed out in that Twitter thread.

If our self-proclaimed trustworthy legal and journalism institutions were less theatrics-based, the actual truth of these allegations could be uncovered without too much effort. But perhaps there's no budget remaining (in any governmental agency, or any journalism outlet) after the multi-year investigation into the alleged Trump/Russia collusion. Whatever the reason, I suspect that for some unknown reason, this issue will be added to the ever growing pile of "things that we know(!) are fake news, even though we don't actually know because we did not investigate them".

EDIT: Interesting (but not surprising) that this article is [flagged], further demonstrating the wide variety of ways in which the distribution of certain categories of ideas can be controlled, even without a central coordination authority. Ideas do very much seem to behave like living organisms, with human minds as their unwitting hosts.

“People don't have ideas. Ideas have people.”

― Carl Jung

Mind Control: How Parasites Manipulate Cognitive Functions in Their Insect Hosts

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.0057...

Neuro-parasitology is an emerging branch of science that deals with parasites that can control the nervous system of the host. It offers the possibility of discovering how one species (the parasite) modifies a particular neural network, and thus particular behaviors, of another species (the host). Such parasite–host interactions, developed over millions of years of evolution, provide unique tools by which one can determine how neuromodulation up-or-down regulates specific behaviors. In some of the most fascinating manipulations, the parasite taps into the host brain neuronal circuities to manipulate hosts cognitive functions.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/1988/10/30/a...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memetics

EDIT:

The Twitter thread:

"So just so I follow this story: Hunter Biden, who lives in Los Angeles, decides to fly 3000 miles across country, to drop off 3 MacBook Pros at a repair shop run by a blind guy who charges the insanely low price of $85 (because there aren't repair shops in LA). He drops them off, signs a contract for repair and then disappears."

Sounds fishy. Let's check Google:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter_Biden

Born Robert Hunter Biden

February 4, 1970 (age 50)

Wilmington, Delaware, U.S.

"Curiously" not mentioned in the Twitter thread (even though it was extremely specific about pointing out the distance between the shop and Hunter's hometown): Wilmington, Delaware

[senectus1]

agree but the same amount of "trust" needs to be leveled at Rudi G as well. its not like he's a proven reliable source of truth...