Talk:Information hazard

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Effective Altruism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relevant to effective altruism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Effective AltruismWikipedia:WikiProject Effective AltruismTemplate:WikiProject Effective AltruismEffective Altruism articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Examples

Would it be appropriate to describe some examples of information hazards on this page? The only one I can find mention of is Roko's basilisk. Noaht2 (talk) 16:33, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I added Roko's basilisk, and I look forward to the discussions of whether it should be censored on wikipedia. Cheers ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°). --Nanite (talk) 18:59, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What about that Tik-Tok trend about stealing cars (the Kia and Hyundai challenge)? 75.90.159.50 (talk) 01:52, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nice Topic, More references can be added — Preceding unsigned comment added by AyeshaBD (talk • contribs) 05:17, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This page is mildly annoying but I've taken the liberty of adding more relevant topics.

I feel like the McCollough effect is relevant at least in some capacity. I also think that Roko's Basilisk is in fact Stupid, and I propose a counter, wherein an AI would be offended or otherwise incensed by the Basklisk and its existence, and thus it becomes a catch 22. In any case, back to civility, I would appreciate cite help and some better formatting. I also can't remember my password, but I'm pretty sure the user should be SkynetPR. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.158.144.117 (talk) 16:39, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree with the statement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AyeshaBD (talk • contribs) 05:29, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

infohazard types

Information that could trigger impulses or traumatic memories could also qualify 2600:1006:B125:2B3A:F85F:AFFF:FEC8:8803 (talk) 18:13, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Should we add a SCP pop culture section?

In SCP, Infohazard is used for information that can harm anyone who knows it. I just wanna know if I should add this. MilitaryFan047 (talk) 02:07, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cognitohazard should be mentioned somewhere as well, as this and infohazard have slightly different definitions. Nervelita (talk) 04:11, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, its not really relevant outside of that piece of fiction. Though it could be mentioned briefly in a "In Fiction" section. Or as one of the "See Also" links. Databased (talk) 21:26, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree completely, and will add the SCP Foundation as one of the See Also links.

Moosetwin (talk) 14:18, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A modest proposal

Because any list of infohazards is definitely itself an infohazard, we should absolutely include a circular link to this page in the list at the bottom, and then screenshot it and add an entry to the article for self-referential humor. Atomic putty? Rien! 17:46, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't remember writing this Atomic putty? Rien! 18:02, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Types of Infohazards that may be fictional or theoretical

There seems to be somewhat of an edit war about “cognitohazards,” which seems to be a term invented by the SCP foundation, but can be applicable to real ideas (like Roko's Basilisk), and other pop culture references, like in Star Trek TNG S5E23 “I, Borg.”

I'd propose that there should be a separate section about either “information hazards in pop culture” or “unconfirmed classifications.”

I'd like to reach an agreement before making this change. <3

Cassie Schebel, almost a savant. <3 (talk) 15:06, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"In pop culture" sections are usually fine, as long as they're supported by reliable, secondary sources. I think you may have an issue with cognitohazards, however; when I removed it yesterday, I did so after looking for sources. The best I could come up with were user-generated sources like wikis, social media posts, SEO churnalism, and Know Your Meme-level sites. Nothing that we'd consider reliable in any way. Maybe others will have better luck, though. Woodroar (talk) 21:13, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: INFO 505 - Foundations of Information Science

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 August 2023 and 11 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Waveformleaf (article contribs). Peer reviewers: TheChosenOneAnakin, AyeshaBD, Scholarlycoffee.

— Assignment last updated by AyeshaBD (talk) 05:14, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lichtenberg figures (or Fractal Burning)

A number of people have died due to improper “fractal burning”. I’d consider these infohazard fatalities (e.g. death as a result of learned [albeit incomplete] information) 213.122.76.207 (talk) 04:54, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]