comment: >
  
  So what do you call people who were cancelled, didn't actually do anything wrong, but their reputation never recovered because people don't care about positive news, only negative?
context: This is a friendly reminder to read our rules.
  Remember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not "thoughts had in the shower!"
  (For an explanation of what a "showerthought" is, please read this page.)
  Rule-breaking posts may result in bans. >
  
  One of the big problems is eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable and the human mind is capable of huge leaps of imaginary faith. >
  
  Came here to say this, it is kinda scary but our memories are constantly beeing rewritten and is quite unreliable >
  
  No they're not, I think you're misremembering that. >
  
  Stop G A S L I G H T I N G me!! >
  
  No one’s gaslighting you, Doug. You’ve been this way since high school >
  
  Gaslighting isn't real, you made that up because you're crazy. >
  
  Gaslighting is an actual thing. The real Canrex would know that. >
  
  You see, Greg, gaslighting wasn't ever in this thread... But did you know cats have nipples? >
  
  Just wait till robots can look like humans and you can't tell them apart. One good lookalike robot and you'll be setup for crimes and murders you didn't do >
  
  Why would you think they'd need a robot to pin whatever they want on you? >
  
  I more mean the op was saying you have to be there to believe it was real... Now you can also be there and still not know if it was real. Super exciting. >
  
  I would say in this instance it's slightly different. Unlike with doctored footage, whatever the robot does still actually happened. It's just a matter of determining if the perpetrator was real or not. >
  
  What is real? >
  
  That which is irreplaceable >
  
  Witness testimony can be unreliable and malleable so I think the only answer is not be certain of anything >
  
  TIL I’ve been living the answer for 60 years! >
  
  Or have you? >
  
  The only think I'm totally certain of is I would never trust a personal eye witness account for anything important. >
  
  Laughs in religion. >
  
  "Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past," repeated Winston obediently. "Who controls the present controls the past," said O'Brien, nodding his head with slow approval. 'Is it your opinion, Winston, that the past has real existence?"
  "The frightening thing, he reflected for the ten thousandth time as he forced his shoulders painfully backward (with hands on hips, they were gyrating their bodies from the waist, an exercise that was supposed to be good for the back muscles) -- the frightening thing was that it might all be true. If the Party could thrust its hand into the past and say of this or that event, it never happened -- that, surely, was more terrifying than mere torture and death?" >
  
  Eye witness reports are some of the least relatable ways to get information. Human memory is actually way worse than most people think. >
  
  On top of that, every thing we witness could be imagination. There is nothing we can be sure of.
  Neither was there before deep fakes existed. >
  
  Thanks for reminding me to book series (written by Duncan Shelley in Hungarian: Az elme gyilkosai) i read a decade ago and had some really deep conversations about with my uncle. >
  
  Blessed time to not be an "influencer". There aren't hours and hours of HD video footage and audio tracks of me to train AI with.
  Video has a bit to go, but audio is CRAZY accurate.  RIP to all those podcasters who never show their face, so spoofing their voice is very hard to deny.
  On the upside, this might end cancel culture, as you can't be sure what is real or not, but on the downside it will allow people to say really shitty things and blame it on AI. >
  
  "Cancel culture" is such a dumb ass phrase. Its called consequences. Sometimes when people say, or do, shitty things, they are ostracized, and have to pay the price for their actions. This isn't a new development in human behavior. We've been "canceling" assholes since the dawn of humanity. >
  
  How about all the "assholes" that have been cancelled just to come out later with proof that they didn't do any of the stuff they were accused of? But then it was too late, their reputation was already ruined? >
  
  Yeah, that's happened all through out history too. This isn't some new kind of behavior in human society. Sometimes people are wrongly accused of bad stuff, and sometimes they actually did the thing they're accused of. When you do something wrong, and are held accountable, that's just life. Its not "cancel culture". >
  
  
  When you do something wrong, and are held accountable, that's just life. Its not "cancel culture".
  
  Are you reading my comment? Many people get cancelled without doing anything wrong. They are cancelled because people blindly believe things without proof. This is a culture, and you can almost call it a cancel culture.
  Just because you don't want to call it what the new terminology is for it, doesn't mean it's not cancel culture. Language changes and evolves. >
  
  I literally responded "sometimes people are wrongly accused"
  Did YOU read what I wrote? 
  Because I don't think it's too hard to understand. Sometimes people get accused of doing something wrong they didn't do. It sucks. But it's not like it's some new development or something. 
  And when people do ACTUALLY do something wrong, they deserve to be ostracized, and called out. 
  That's how life works. 
  Consequences and repercussions. 
  It's not "cancel culture".