[-] sue_me_please@awful.systems 23 points 1 month ago

And this is their reply:

I still think this is hyperbole

Followed by ten thousand words that I'm not reading

[-] sue_me_please@awful.systems 22 points 1 month ago

Lol that money went to buy 20,000 copies of HPMOR

80

It's the Guardian, but it's still a good read. All of Sneerclub's favorite people were involved.

Last weekend, Lighthaven was the venue for the Manifest 2024 conference, which, according to the website, is “hosted by Manifold and Manifund”. Manifold is a startup that runs Manifund, a prediction market – a forecasting method that was the ostensible topic of the conference.

Prediction markets are a long-held enthusiasm in the EA and rationalism subcultures, and billed guests included personalities like Scott Siskind, AKA Scott Alexander, founder of Slate Star Codex; misogynistic George Mason University economist Robin Hanson; and Eliezer Yudkowsky, founder of the Machine Intelligence Research Institute (Miri).

Billed speakers from the broader tech world included the Substack co-founder Chris Best and Ben Mann, co-founder of AI startup Anthropic. Alongside these guests, however, were advertised a range of more extreme figures.

One, Jonathan Anomaly, published a paper in 2018 entitled Defending Eugenics, which called for a “non-coercive” or “liberal eugenics” to “increase the prevalence of traits that promote individual and social welfare”. The publication triggered an open letter of protest by Australian academics to the journal that published the paper, and protests at the University of Pennsylvania when he commenced working there in 2019. (Anomaly now works at a private institution in Quito, Ecuador, and claims on his website that US universities have been “ideologically captured”.)

Another, Razib Khan, saw his contract as a New York Times opinion writer abruptly withdrawn just one day after his appointment had been announced, following a Gawker report that highlighted his contributions to outlets including the paleoconservative Taki’s Magazine and anti-immigrant website VDare.

The Michigan State University professor Stephen Hsu, another billed guest, resigned as vice-president of research there in 2020 after protests by the MSU Graduate Employees Union and the MSU student association accusing Hsu of promoting scientific racism.

Brian Chau, executive director of the “effective accelerationist” non-profit Alliance for the Future (AFF), was another billed guest. A report last month catalogued Chau’s long history of racist and sexist online commentary, including false claims about George Floyd, and the claim that the US is a “Black supremacist” country. “Effective accelerationists” argue that human problems are best solved by unrestricted technological development.

Another advertised guest, Michael Lai, is emblematic of tech’s new willingness to intervene in Bay Area politics. Lai, an entrepreneur, was one of a slate of “Democrats for Change” candidates who seized control of the powerful Democratic County Central Committee from progressives, who had previously dominated the body that confers endorsements on candidates for local office.

122
295
72
122
232
80
228
57
411
135
231
[-] sue_me_please@awful.systems 14 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Have we considered that we're wrong for criminalizing the smartest and most philanthropic people on the planet?

[-] sue_me_please@awful.systems 12 points 7 months ago

God it feels so fucking good not knowing who any of these idiots are, time to ruin that feeling forever

[-] sue_me_please@awful.systems 20 points 8 months ago

These are the thoughts of the smartest people on Earth. If you don't get it maybe you just aren't that smart?

[-] sue_me_please@awful.systems 10 points 8 months ago

Techlords are coming to rescue with animal sex dolls and bots.

[-] sue_me_please@awful.systems 28 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

If this technocratic psycho was more concerned with actually contemplating the morality of the question, and less focused on rearranging the insides of a parrot, his takes might be a little less monstrous.

It's always funny realizing those who think they're asking the tough questions that others aren't smart enough to consider only ever talk about the same handful of topics: putting down minorities, advocating white supremacy, whining about anyone to the left of Pinochet and fucking animals/kids.

Like that's 95% of the content on the Motte or "I"DW.

[-] sue_me_please@awful.systems 11 points 8 months ago

Lol @ the Scooby snack line

[-] sue_me_please@awful.systems 14 points 8 months ago

Evolution is when all of the animal fuckers die from zoonotic diseases.

[-] sue_me_please@awful.systems 26 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

What a bunch of fucking ghouls.

From the replies:

Thanks for this, really valuable work!

I'm curious what the qualitative description of child marriage usually looks like in these cases- I have two very rough mental images:

A 14 year-old girl learning very little at school/ barely attends school. She's very unlikely to continue studying past the age of 16. Her (very low-income) parents struggle to continue supporting her and would rather she married earlier to reduce their burden and make a bit of bridewealth money (maybe to concentrate resources on another child). She gets married, her husband takes on responsibility for her (he might be more responsible/ caring than her parents), and her life outcomes don't change much from if she were to get married at 17.

A 14 year-old girl is learning quite a lot at school. She dreams of going to college/ sixth-form/ university and could even afford to if she got a part-time job, but family/ cultural pressure leads her to get married early. She has a child at 15, is forced to stay in her village, and all of her plans go to waste.

Could it be that people like to imagine something more like the second scenario when the first is more common?

These people are completely fine with child marriage/rape if the kids didn't do well in school like they did. Their ability to empathize completely breaks down the second it meets their contempt for non-nerds.

These are the psychopaths who think they're effective altruists.

[-] sue_me_please@awful.systems 13 points 10 months ago

He literally cites one of the authors of the Fascist Manifesto lmao

Patron Saints of Techno-Optimism

In lieu of detailed endnotes and citations, read the work of these people, and you too will become a Techno-Optimist.

...

Filippo Tommaso Marinetti

[-] sue_me_please@awful.systems 18 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

This is up there with the time that rationalists convinced themselves to get addicted to heroin for productivity or whatever.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34648499

EA appeals to exactly that kind of really-smart-person who is perfectly capable of convincing themselves that they're always right about everything. And from there, you can justify all kinds of terrible things.

I came to the same conclusion after a group of my friends got involved with the local rationalist and EA community, though for a different reason: Their drug habits.

They believed themselves to have a better grasp on human nature and behavior than the average person, and therefore believed they were better at controlling themselves. They also had a deep contrarian bias, which turned into a belief that drugs weren’t actually as bad as the system wanted us to believe.

Combine these two factors and they convinced themselves that they could harness recreational opioid use to improve their lives, but avoid the negative consequences that “normies” suffered by doing it wrong. I remember being at a party where several of them were explaining that they were on opioids right now and tried to use the fact that nothing terrible was happening as proof that they were performing rational drug use.

Long story short, the realities of recreational opioid use caught up with them and they were blind to the warning signs due to their hubris. I intentionally drifted away from that group around that time, so I don’t know what happened to them.

I will never forget how confident they were that addiction is something that only happens to other people, not rationalists like them.

view more: next ›

sue_me_please

joined 1 year ago