(2015nov11 thread) It’s interesting to witness how people throw the term “echo chamber” around to criticize others who are careful about curating information.

Technically, Elon Musk lives in an “echo chamber”, too. He solicits negative feedback from a small, diverse group of smart people. Does OK.

If I assume the worst about such critics, I’d interpret them as weeds complaining about walled rose gardens. They’re bitter and envious. But what about the best possible interpretation? I’m guessing they simply don’t relate to the pressures faced by those truly overwhelmed with info

“If I were X, I would listen to everyone & never mute or block anyone!” is easy to say when you have 10 notifications a day instead of 9,999

Also I think… a person with skin in the game is likelier to solicit accurate information than a person w/o, regardless of “echo chamber”

This seems contradictory with my earlier (2007-2012) criticisms of “people in ivory towers” (heads of State, CEOs of large companies…)

What I’ve learnt since is that those folks are way better informed than they seem. They seem that way because they make decisions we don’t like. But usually (I think) that’s a function of having to make very difficult decisions where all options are unpleasant.

Eg: it’s easy for me to criticize the Minister for Education. But truth is he has responsibilities and challenges I am blissfully unaware of. What to do, then? I think suspend judgement + seek working consensus on definitions of problems → make incremental progress.

Of course there’s always a need for powerful thought pieces that challenge our POV. But it’s taking action afterwards that’s really hard.

If you don’t thoughtfully, deliberately design your own echo chamber, one will be designed for you.

“Echo chamber” is phrase that can be used to dismiss anybody who has taken the trouble to design an apparatus for processing info. But every serious info operator HAS to do it. Refuse to weed your garden, and your flowers will die + be overrun with weeds