Chuck Klosterman

One of the things he mentions is this kind of as a side sort of, is something that I've always kind of kept in my mind, which was this test that one time was done on people, where they would say like, take a picture of a fire hydrant next to like a Volvo, okay? and then they would make the photo extremely blurry.

One of the things he mentions is this kind of as a side sort of, is something that I've always kind of kept in my mind, which was this test that one time was done on people, where they would say like, take a picture of a fire hydrant next to like a Volvo, okay? and then they would make the photo extremely blurry.

One of the things he mentions is this kind of as a side sort of, is something that I've always kind of kept in my mind, which was this test that one time was done on people, where they would say like, take a picture of a fire hydrant next to like a Volvo, okay? and then they would make the photo extremely blurry.

And then they would have two groups of people look at that image, slowly become sharper. They would take away the fuzziness. Some people were given 25 steps. There would be 25 steps along the way from the most fuzzy to the least fuzzy. And some people would be given 10. I'm just kind of making these figures up. But one is like, it's 25 incremental steps against 10 incremental steps.

And then they would have two groups of people look at that image, slowly become sharper. They would take away the fuzziness. Some people were given 25 steps. There would be 25 steps along the way from the most fuzzy to the least fuzzy. And some people would be given 10. I'm just kind of making these figures up. But one is like, it's 25 incremental steps against 10 incremental steps.

And then they would have two groups of people look at that image, slowly become sharper. They would take away the fuzziness. Some people were given 25 steps. There would be 25 steps along the way from the most fuzzy to the least fuzzy. And some people would be given 10. I'm just kind of making these figures up. But one is like, it's 25 incremental steps against 10 incremental steps.

And they did find that the people who had 25 incremental steps more information, figured out it was a fire hydrant in a Volvo later. Because every sort of wrong image allowed them to sort of make up what it could be. Maybe it's a Dalmatian. Oh, maybe it's a Rubik's Cube or whatever.

And they did find that the people who had 25 incremental steps more information, figured out it was a fire hydrant in a Volvo later. Because every sort of wrong image allowed them to sort of make up what it could be. Maybe it's a Dalmatian. Oh, maybe it's a Rubik's Cube or whatever.

And they did find that the people who had 25 incremental steps more information, figured out it was a fire hydrant in a Volvo later. Because every sort of wrong image allowed them to sort of make up what it could be. Maybe it's a Dalmatian. Oh, maybe it's a Rubik's Cube or whatever.

Whereas the people getting only the 10 incremental changes were better because they didn't have the ability to sort of project other ideas onto what it was. What you're saying is kind of the same thing. That you're saying that because of TikTok in a way, people are getting all these sort of random images of things. It allows them to have sort of obscure, arcane, inaccurate thoughts.

Whereas the people getting only the 10 incremental changes were better because they didn't have the ability to sort of project other ideas onto what it was. What you're saying is kind of the same thing. That you're saying that because of TikTok in a way, people are getting all these sort of random images of things. It allows them to have sort of obscure, arcane, inaccurate thoughts.

Whereas the people getting only the 10 incremental changes were better because they didn't have the ability to sort of project other ideas onto what it was. What you're saying is kind of the same thing. That you're saying that because of TikTok in a way, people are getting all these sort of random images of things. It allows them to have sort of obscure, arcane, inaccurate thoughts.

That they're seeing more stuff. That could be. That's not such a crazy thing.

That they're seeing more stuff. That could be. That's not such a crazy thing.

That they're seeing more stuff. That could be. That's not such a crazy thing.

Exactly, exactly. That's the mistake. Yep. The idea that sort of like we can have an understanding of these things by casting the widest possible net. So any random person's ideas have to be sort of taken seriously. But that's not actually how it works. Like if we, you know, say with music, for example, when we think about like, you know, which acts from the past are significant.

Exactly, exactly. That's the mistake. Yep. The idea that sort of like we can have an understanding of these things by casting the widest possible net. So any random person's ideas have to be sort of taken seriously. But that's not actually how it works. Like if we, you know, say with music, for example, when we think about like, you know, which acts from the past are significant.

Exactly, exactly. That's the mistake. Yep. The idea that sort of like we can have an understanding of these things by casting the widest possible net. So any random person's ideas have to be sort of taken seriously. But that's not actually how it works. Like if we, you know, say with music, for example, when we think about like, you know, which acts from the past are significant.

Es kann nicht sein, dass man jede einzelne Person fragt, wer einen größeren Einfluss auf Musik hatte. Wenn man die Fleetwood Mac und die Velvet Underground fragt. It's like more people have obviously heard of Fleetwood Mac. They're going to give that answer, right?

Es kann nicht sein, dass man jede einzelne Person fragt, wer einen größeren Einfluss auf Musik hatte. Wenn man die Fleetwood Mac und die Velvet Underground fragt. It's like more people have obviously heard of Fleetwood Mac. They're going to give that answer, right?