@jeffwM to News • edit-21 year agoGen Z falls for online scams more than their boomer grandparents dowww.vox.comexternal-linkmessage-square167arrow-up1562arrow-down141cross-posted to: technology
arrow-up1521arrow-down1external-linkGen Z falls for online scams more than their boomer grandparents dowww.vox.com@jeffwM to News • edit-21 year agomessage-square167cross-posted to: technology
minus-square@NightAuthorlinkEnglish2•1 year agoI’m curious: are you the kind of person who thinks all generalizations are bad?
minus-squareTedeschelinkEnglish1•1 year agoGeneralizations are, by definition, inaccurate. I don’t know if that’s what you mean by “bad,” but if it is, that’s not my opinion, it’s just what the word means.
minus-square@NightAuthorlinkEnglish1•1 year agoThe context for this convo seems missing, not sure what happened…. Anyway, this is generally what I’d say about generalizations: Well, some people seem to be of the mind that generalizations are always bad, as in morally wrong. And generalizations, based on evidence, are a recognition of a pattern. Depending on the generalization, it can be potentially very useful. Like brightly colored animals aren’t safe to eat. That’s a good (more accurate than not) and useful generalization. It depends on the amount and quality of evidence used in the creation of the generalization, and probably the intelligence of the generalizer. Though I don’t recall the point I was trying to Make.
Removed by mod
I’m curious: are you the kind of person who thinks all generalizations are bad?
Generalizations are, by definition, inaccurate. I don’t know if that’s what you mean by “bad,” but if it is, that’s not my opinion, it’s just what the word means.
The context for this convo seems missing, not sure what happened…. Anyway, this is generally what I’d say about generalizations:
Well, some people seem to be of the mind that generalizations are always bad, as in morally wrong.
And generalizations, based on evidence, are a recognition of a pattern. Depending on the generalization, it can be potentially very useful.
Like brightly colored animals aren’t safe to eat. That’s a good (more accurate than not) and useful generalization.
It depends on the amount and quality of evidence used in the creation of the generalization, and probably the intelligence of the generalizer.
Though I don’t recall the point I was trying to Make.