(www.scientificamerican.com)

757 points headalgorithm | 2 comments | 05 Feb 25 14:55 UTC | HN request time: 0.621s | source

Show context

breakingrules3[dead post] ◴[05 Feb 25 15:49 UTC] No.42950224[source]▶

[flagged]

1. Rygian ◴[05 Feb 25 15:56 UTC] No.42950346[source]▶

Your comment relies on the broken assumption that outrage is caused by the outragee having stupid opinions/being stupid.

It fails to account for the majority of outrage-inducing news where the stupidity is at the source.

replies(1): >>42950512 #

2. sceptic123 ◴[05 Feb 25 16:07 UTC] No.42950512[source]▶

Doesn't it rather suggest that it's stupid to get outraged at the news?

Avoiding outrage fatigue while staying informed