1129
It's expensive to be poor (thelemmy.club)
submitted 2 months ago by [M] to c/latestagecapitalism@lemmy.world
180 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -1 points 2 months ago (5 children)

You won't believe this but literally every parable and nearly every single thing written in history is made up. There was no Sodom and Gomorrah, there was no Ark, there was no giant horse to invade Troy, Cleopatra wasn't hot, Alexander wasn't that Great, Paul probably didn't exist, etc.

But the reason humans tell stories is to illustrate something. This may have been a bot just reposting sentiment, but it still got that sentiment from somewhere. In fact this "story" as you call it has been going around the internet longer than you've been alive based on your comments in this thread. It's a common problem. And one ignored by pretty much everyone in power and their fans.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago* (4 children)

    That's the most defeatist argument I've heard. "The stories of history are fake, most of the internet is fake, so we're justified in presenting a made-up story as real, like we've been doing all along."

    I'm sorry. I'm not supporting an obvious engagement farm just because it "illustrates something" worthwhile. That's the fundamental reason why the internet is in such a horrendous state right.

    To be clear, I have no problem with stories, or even "embellished history," if they're labeled as such. I mean, I know history is a interpreted construct with embellishment, that was middle school history class.

    But this is presented as an example of a real human being's experience. It's why people are upvoting it.

    And that's a straight-up lie.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (3 children)

    No, people are upvoting it because they can relate with it, and it is factual, regardless of it if happened to a real human.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago* (2 children)

    There's a word for made up stories misleadingly presented as an authentic human account, and its not "factual."

    I'm not saying it hasn't happened to a real human either. I agree with the seniment of the story.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    The 'sentiment,' aka the circumstances being lamented, are 100% factual.

    The story might not be.

    If I write about how I tried and failed to move faster than the speed of light by lighting my farts on fire, the story is fake, but it's factual. I would not ever be able to move faster than the speed of light by lighting my farts on fire. Everyone can understand that, as long as they have a reference of the amount of energy generated by flaming farts and a reference for what the speed of light is and the amount of energy that it requires to get there.

    Renting in the united states requires at minimum 3x the monthly rent to be paid upfront, usually 4x the monthly rent, along with a non-refundable application fee which often is just lost and denied. If I write a story about how a anthropomorphic bunny is having a hard time renting due to not being able to raise enough money on only fans to handle these ridiculous requirements, the story is still factual and makes a point about the real circumstances in this world regardless of the fact anthropomorphic bunnies have not been proven to exist yet.

    So yes, it would get upvoted despite taking liberties with the exact details and thus being a fictionalized version of reality that uses facts from reality to make a point.

    I suppose the real problem I have with your critique is that it's pointless to attack an AI version of a meme because of the content of the meme which has been reposted in a million ways by humans before you found your way onto the internet, instead of attacking the fact it's just an AI powered repost of a true meme.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago*

    So yes, it would get upvoted despite taking liberties with the exact details and thus being a fictionalized version of reality that uses facts from reality to make a point.

    I call nonsense.

    If you replaced "Me" and "I" and "Jeremy" in this post with "anthropomorphic bunny," making it clear the text is not from a real person, there's no way it would be on the front page of Lemmy. It wouldn't have even made it wherever OP saw it.

    I suppose the real problem I have with your critique is that it’s pointless to attack an AI version of a meme because of the content of the meme which has been reposted in a million ways by humans before you found your way onto the internet, instead of attacking the fact it’s just an AI powered repost of a true meme.

    I find this implausible too.

    If it was a meme with a message you didn't like, would you have issue with an "AI powered repost of a true meme?" You can't tell me you wouldn't. Just because you like the message, that its sentiment is true somewhere doesn't make presenting a fabrication as a real anecdote ethical.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent