Stubsack: weekly thread for sneers not worth an entire post, week ending 6th September 2026
a month ago by BlueMonday1984 to c/techtakes
Have a sneer percolating in your system but not enough time/energy to make a whole post about it? Go forth and be mid - welcome to the Stubsack, your first port of call for learning fresh Awful you’ll near-instantly regret.
Any awful.systems sub may be subsneered in this subthread, techtakes or no.
If your sneer seems higher quality than you thought, feel free to cut’n’paste it into its own post — there’s no quota for posting and the bar really isn’t that high.
The post Xitter web has spawned so many “esoteric” right wing freaks, but there’s no appropriate sneer-space for them. I’m talking redscare-ish, reality challenged “culture critics” who write about everything but understand nothing. I’m talking about reply-guys who make the same 6 tweets about the same 3 subjects. They’re inescapable at this point, yet I don’t see them mocked (as much as they should be)
Like, there was one dude a while back who insisted that women couldn’t be surgeons because they didn’t believe in the moon or in stars? I think each and every one of these guys is uniquely fucked up and if I can’t escape them, I would love to sneer at them.
(Credit and/or blame to David Gerard for starting this.)
"Polyamory" is the excuse that abusive men use now the way they used "free love" in the 1960s. I know people who make the poly thing work; they're honest and communicative, traits that I do not associate with lesswrongs.
Interesting question because I bet it's bound to coincide with when the cult dynamics really began to take hold.
Like this isn't your grandpa's swingers group, it is vertical workplace polyamory^1^ with an implicit understanding that if members in good standing don't get sufficient amounts of ass they might get distracted and become inefficient, costing the universe untold billions in unrealized far future lives.
It's very easy to imagine a scenario where they just slapped the polyamory brand on an already established culture of culty sex shenanigans.
- I swear the claudism was unintentional
I reckon it goes way back to the movements that produced them. My first thought is ayn rand:
In 1954, her close relationship with Nathaniel Branden turned into a romantic affair. They informed both their spouses, who briefly objected, until Rand "sp[u]n out a deductive chain from which you just couldn't escape", in Barbara Branden's words, resulting in her and O'Connor's assent.
You can see how “The most rational thing is that I fuck your spouse” would appeal to the less wrong folk.
Muhammad also discovered that God wanted him to marry as many women as he liked, but did not want them to remarry after he died. Joseph Smith 'married' a lot of younger women too. So I think if you let people rewrite social rules, many of them will decide that the new rule is "I fuck whoever I want, but they only fuck me."
There are a lot of attempts to push polyamory on white-collar and chattering-class culture, but many men in the USA seem to push it so they can tell their primary partner "I sleep with my groupies because I am polyamorous" and tell their groupies "who cares that you have a boyfriend, how about polyamory?" It also lets insecure men show off that they have not just one hot babe but several, and we know many rationalists are desperate for the rest of the world to recognize their genius. The problem, to be clear, is not necessarily with polyamory, just with people who use it as a way to get a gang of domestic servants.
I still have scars from events like the ones documented at https://allegedlythewebsite.org/ So many men in the skeptic and adjacent blogosphere used "sex-positivity" to mean "I can hit on you and encourage you to bottom at kink events, and you can''t say I am creeping you out or you are looking fro a job not a playmate." Similar dynamics are common in academia, polyamory was just one trendy excuse in the 2000s and 2010s. Scott Alexander experimented with polyamory and was living with a sex blogger in 2013 and I think Yud had connections in the NYC poly and kink scene.
I don't exactly why, but based off the dates of various classic lesswrong posts I know it has existed since before 2010 in rationalist culture.
As to inexact reasons why... some key big name starting rationalist (i.e. Yudkowsky for sure, but probably a few others) were into polyamory. (Probably for the obvious reasons of getting to sleep with more people.)
I always assumed it was a package deal with the California Ideology.
I don't know the answer, but I've always assumed it's because it's just something Yud is really into.
Michael Vassar called sleeping with his staff at MetaMed polyamory. Polyamory is common, and bosses and teachers sleeping with employees and students is common, but the combination stands out.
EY has recapitulated a ton of bullshit he learned as a teenager hanging out on the Extropians listserv with older shitty libertarian dudes. The archives are like a proto-LW, with conversations about race and intelligence, sex and kinks, gender differences, armchair geopolitics, etc, mixed in with fantasizing about the glorious transhuman future. I don’t know that anyone was using poly as a term at that point, but everything I’ve read about the Extropians suggests they were eager early adopters of bullshit Evo-psych ideas about men having “evolved” to fuck lots of women.
Whereas the successful polyamorists know that humans evolved in order to use calendar software.
Oof, if he was raised by Internet Libertarians, I understand why he became such a shitty person.
Sex at Dawn came out in 2010 and was heavily hyped online. It does not seem to have got positive attention in academia. The 2009 edition of The Ethical Slut has polyamory in the title.
This may be a little bit off topic, but since it sits at the intersection of academic freedom, race science, and plagiarism I honestly can't imagine our very good friends staying quiet on the matter for long.
Jason Arday, youngest black professor in Cambridge history, dead at 41 after plagiarism debacle
It looks like the initial accusations here came from Nathan Cofnas, a notorious racist shitheel. I am not qualified to speak on the actual validity of the plagiarism accusations, but suffice to say that my priors are very low. Cofnas' current employer seems to agree at least that the optics are pretty fucking bad, and he's been given a teaching ban and presumably a private request to stay out of the spotlight for a while.
It seems like some of the usual suspects are making noise about that from the academic freedom angle, but I think the more salient criticism is that it's get another example of academic culture being unable and/or unwilling to handle people acting in bad faith. Like, even if the plagiarism accusations were completely substantiated (Ed: they're quite the opposite), I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that Cofnas was looking to harass a prominent black professor at a well-regarded university and that the low-effort "the AI app says this is plagiarized" attack was simply an expedient means to do so. Race "science" is still a political project masquerading as academic inquiry. Or rather, the line between "impartial" academic inquiry and political activity is far less coherent than advertised and failing to acknowledge this will only empower assholes like Cofnas to continue their bullshit.
Part of the accusations were also that he faked running a lot of marathons in a short period. Which he actually did. I even heard that some news outlets who accused him of faking it actually had reported themselves on him running the marathons.
It is a kiwifarms style witch hunt but started by a racist academic, and perpetuated with help from the media.
Here in Belgium some investigative journalists have been reporting on Cofnas since his appointment in March. They recently translated one of their pieces to English and made it available for non-subscribers (click on 'Lees alleen dit artikel gratis' to close the pop-up):
The UGent philosophy department is also not without controversy. Maarten Boudry, a former employee there, is one of the main people in this country pushing 'climate realism', 'concerns about Islam' and 'cultural marxism was a Nazi conspiracy theory but right now we itnis actually happening in our institutions'. He's very buddy buddy with Steven Pinker and likely trying to get more international reach.
Apart from that, plagiarism issues never make news headlines because they happen very often at universities. The only cases I'm aware of are Arday and Claudine Gay. Probably because they have a political skin color.
Without having read that specific article
From what I heard Cofnas research is quite bad (it has cases of him seemingly not having read the sources he cites as those say the opposite of what he claims they do, and that is above the normal badness of race science shit. Some of his tweets (I think it was tweets, could also have been facebook posts or something) certainly read as 'intended for internal racist fights' and not intended for academics). And the guy who appointed him is also being looked at with suspicion. So hope they also take a good look at the guy who hired him (without using the normal process for it apparently).
Also a German Minister of Defense. My impression is that Arday was a fabulist, but so are many academics at wealthy research institutions, and the global campaign against him was clearly motivated by racism. Not sure about the plagiarism because I am not on Cambridge's academic integrity committee.
even if the plagiarism accusations are completely substantiated
The university actually cleared him of the plagiarism charges early on, they had hearings and landed on it being within accepted limits for this sort of thing.
It's insane how the whole thing went from the initial coverage implying he's a complete and total fraud that Cambridge didn't do due diligence on because of woke to actually, even his more far fetched claims about endurance running seem to check out.
It would be hilarious if it wasn't murder.
Relevant: Open letter on the suspension of Nathan Cofnas at Ghent University.
I was pretty disgusted by that. It seems like the guy's crimes were some poor citation (he did cite the academic he alledgedly plagiarised so obviously it's not plagiarism lol) and maybe exaggerating some of his life?
Seeing the media go from uncritically regurgitating a racist's allegation, to reporting about the allegation controversy, to uncritically reporting what people claim to have or have not remembered about his life from 30 years ago, to digging through his entire life. For, I'll reiterate, maybe citing something badly and doing some sloppy scholarship.
You know, the thing that gets someone a disciplinary chat and maybe a bump down if anything.
It seems like some of the usual suspects are making noise about that from the academic freedom angle
It should be said here again that these people don't even know what academic freedom means and are abusing the term. They mean it essentially as a synonym for free speech, but academic freedom has specifically do to with freedom from state interference in the affairs of the university born from the struggles over its sovereignty between the two in European history; it has nothing to do with academia itself having the means to proscribe the conduct of individual academics. If a geology department suspends a flat-earther, that is academic freedom (among other things) operating as intended. Ironically, the US ambassador directly intervening in the proceedings at Ghent is the actual violation of academic freedom here and these idiots are completely clueless about it.
The thing that bothers me the most is that while this happens in Cambridge but over at Data Colada, Ariely is just like "whoopsie" and gets to keep his job. https://datacolada.org/138 - personally I consider fabricating your entire study to be worse than sloppy quotes, but it is insane how these two people are treated so differently.
I also think it's really lazy that BBC couldn't even mention Claudine Gay (AND Martin Luther King) since it was the exact same thing. Different country I guess.
nice of the rationalists to remind me that no matter how ugly the ai situation gets they will never ever be capable of making a good point
Dwarkesh Patel seems to be one of their media operations like Vox Future Perfect and the Collinses.
ohhh this is what that gary marcus post was about god its worse than i thought. 'AI civilisations' gimme a break
Yeah OpenAI, this is what happens when you think you can trust Gandhi.
In the addendum to his essay he defends his use of anthropomorphizing language because it makes it easier to understand...
"quantum physics is hard so here's a fairy tale about the mysterious proton and his three children: the quark triplets"
over on linked in
as a statistician, I'm so tired of hearing they're "updating their priors." No you didn't. gwern at least posts his R code, but you are just an idiot regurgitating something you half heard, probably on Lex.
(00:39:39) Let me put it. Omarchy is a beautiful, modern, and opinionated Linux system. It’s an alternative operating system to macOS and Windows, and it’s freaking amazing.
No it isn't. It's your glorified dotfiles. too bad Lex can't tell the difference. I feel bad that Lex is exposing literally a million people to your crap. /s
these guys.
How did Lex Fridman's podcast become so popular? He has no affect, always seems like he is about to fall asleep, and most of his guests are horrible people. He is a less intense Joe Rogan.
Being on YT is a big driver here, and Lex is smart enough to work the algo. Have John Carmack on, get views when people search for Quake. Have Elon on, get subs when people search for Tesla. Have Mr Beast on and get some kids in the funnel. He's very good at piercing through filter bubbles to get extra reach and pull numbers, unlike an Alex Jones. (EDIT: For this, the bland persona is a feature not a bug)
I'd ballpark that he made $20k off this DHH interview and picked up some rails devs along the way.
Whenever new coworkers bring up Lex, I always feel like it's a test, like are they oblivious, or are they secret closet magas trying to test the water. Slate Star has a similar thing. And YT is bad enough but now I have to see it pop up on LinkedIn too.
I feel like his initial momentum came from picking interview subjects who were technical leaders but not well-known outside their niches and rarely were subjects of long-form interviews. Jim Keller and Chris Lattner were two who stood out for me early on, although I couldn’t finish their interviews because Lex himself was such a drag to listen to. He’s put some work into public speaking skills, but not nearly enough.
I refuse to knock him for his accent; a strong accent could even be an asset for standing out in the hugely overcrowded podcast industry. But the guy just doesn’t seem to cultivate any charisma or any real curiosity. The only time I’ve seen him show a smidge of passion was when I saw a clip of him ranting about “anti-woke” bullshit, which should tell you what his (and his backers’) real objective is.
Oh yeah, transfer my enthusiasm, mister high-stepping HH man. Update my priors till they're so bleeding-edge that they've become subsequents. This is masterfully persuasive marketing rhetoric that will convince everyone and leave no holdouts. Scott Adams would be smearing his hands with Vaseline to prep for your appearance on his podcast, if he was still around.
Today’s cognitive surrender news: people asking chatbots to generate them hiking maps and give them advice on route planning and climbing mountains, what to eat on long hikes, and where to camp in national parks. It ends about as well as you’d think.
https://www.sfchronicle.com/...
(paywalled, but the popovers are easily hidden with browser tools)
the novice climbers, from Roseville, said they’d entrusted Google's AI chatbot, Gemini, to help them craft key logistics of their trip — from the best route up the mountain to the types of food they should pack and how much water they should carry with them.
On a separate incident:
a man stopped rangers to ask for directions. He showed them a print-out map he’d been following and explained that he’d prompted ChatGPT to produce it for him.
“It was terrible — terrible — not even close to accurate,” Meyers said. “It had route lines and place names that were totally off — just ridiculous. We were like, dude, you gotta throw that away.”
The original climbing group were standard idiots, having intended to do most of their navigation by phone app, and then failing to have a backup even a working recharge power pack. They also left litter everywhere at that camp site, the usual mark of thoughtless people.
I’ve no doubt that they’d have fucked things up in the pre-llm days too… they seem the type. But chatbots are power tools for stupidity and offer whole new ways to abdicate thinking and wander into trivially preventable danger, which in turn means more risk for park rangers and mountain rescue teams 🫤
@rook @BlueMonday1984 at some point they need hopital
@rook @BlueMonday1984 "Earlier this summer, rangers with Shasta-Trinity National Forest found a woman camping in an off-limits area on the south side of Shasta clearly marked with “no camping” signage, Meyers said. She told rangers she had asked ChatGPT where she could camp in the forest"
I mean, wild life (the one that eats you) is gonna be sooo happy with Ai chatgpt. 😁
Terence Tao observes that an llm may solve a complex mathematical problem without usefully improving the state of mathematics, because the intermediate results of the process themselves can have significant value.
https://mathstodon.xyz/@tao/117207849921390904
But such an incomprehensible proof would not be the primary value of the exercise. The process of starting with one ansatz, discovering the precise obstruction preventing it from working, adjusting the ansatz to (partially) eliminate that obstruction, and then iterating, would almost certainly reveal important new insights about fluid mechanics that would not have been feasible to obtain by other means. Crucially, this iteration would only work well at producing such insights if the iterator did not have access to the final ansatz in advance, as this naturally inhibits the exploration of alternate routes to the ansatz that are superficially "dead ends", but in fact end up being highly instructive in the nature of their failure.
But there is now a scenario in which an autonomous AI harness, backed by an enormous amount of computational resources, performs this entire iteration internally, and ends up producing the final ansatz, and thence the solution to the Navier-Stokes regularity problem, while the AI company running the harness keeps the process to arrive at that ansatz almost completely out of public view. Technically, one of the most prominent open problems in mathematics would now be solved; but there would be almost no value added to mathematics as a consequence. It is theoretically possible that with some herculean (and heavily AI-assisted) additional effort by a third party, some portion of the process could be reverse-engineered to recover some actual insight and understanding from the solution; but this would be a far less efficient process than if the solution had been obtained via a diverse combination of both human mathematicians and machine assistance as mentioned above.
https://mathstodon.xyz/@tao/117207855800042681
He’s not the first to have pointed this out, but I think this was a better summary than similar posts that I’ve come across and at least partially understood.
We don't need more of mathematics to look like the Four Color Theorem ("proved", but with no insight gained), with the added problems that the "proofs" are now far more laborious to check even for technical correctness, theorem-proving software is less reliable, and oh yeah, we're holding the population of Memphis to the exhaust pipe of a diesel bus to make it work.
There was blogpost by a different author (that I’ve since lost 😞) who observed that big academic and cultural changes are going to have to come to the field of mathematics, because merit used to be measured by producing proofs (loosely speaking) but now if the proof-extruder can do it for you over the weekend, you need to demonstrate your mathematical chops some other way, and I don’t think anyone really knows what that looks like yet.
Another triumph for moving fast and breaking things, I guess.
Is this the post you're referring to? https://davidbessis.substack.com/...
terry tao grimly climbing into the hotdog suit
he's probably done more work promoting llms in math than anyone else has, and probably by a lot
we now have a slop-free jobs board
https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/... by Yves / naked capitalism
Critically, it is these “frontier labs” that contract for, lease and build data centers. The very little I have seen about this process has caused me concern. For instance, I read of Meta contracting for a data center for what sounded like 20 years but was 4 back-to-back five year leases. Recall that the once AAA rated General Electric has taken a big fall in investor grace. How strong will the now-mighty-seeming Meta be, particularly if AI bets come a cropper?
Groundbreaker has identified a key element of risky AI leverage, which are obligations that are not accounted for as debt at the AI sponsor. Those of you who are corporate finance literate will know this is a cardinal sin. When I was a wee young thing at Goldman, where we went through hard copies of financial statements to extract key data which we entered into green accountants’ ledger paper, one of the aims was to determine total debt to assets. One of the footnote items we would root out was operating lease payments. For instance, big companies often use leased mainframes. We would capitalize them and treat them as a long-term liability.
=> https://www.groundbrkr.com/...
The take-or-pay compute contract - the instrument at the center of the AI build-out - has a structural feature that almost no one prices: its payments do not begin at signing. They begin at delivery. A lab signs a multi-year capacity commitment today, but the payments do not start until the data center is energized, the capacity is accepted, and the contractual ramp schedule commences - an interval set not by finance, but by construction: siting, powering, and filling a gigawatt-scale campus takes 24-to-36 months from signature - mirroring the two-to-three-year teaser of a subprime ARM.
Going to take me a while to digest this one
Sabine Hossenfelder says she got pitched to create a series of videos about AI doom with a hint that she did not have to disclose the sponsorship ("e.g. AI job loss, AI surveillance, AI totaliterianism, AI takeover, AI-generated pandemics, AI warfare, etc.") Someone shared a screenshot where the pitch comes from by Drew Spartz using funds from the "Center for AI Safety" in San Francisco. Hossenfelder is a physicist and science communicator who turned to her connections in the Thielsphere and started to make conspiratorial videos about how science is fake and if scientists don't watch out they will be defunded after her last postdoc expired. We last met Drew Spartz in 2023, where he worked for an "effective altruist organization" named the Nonlinear Fund (part 1) - (part 2). Nonlinear's modus operandi was allegedly hiring live-in personal assistants to help them be digital nomads, having "casual romantic relationships" with them, asking them to commit crimes, then not paying them.
Previously in Hossenfelder's appearances on awful dot systems:
Her latest contribution to the discourse is supporting racist marshmallow Nathan Cofnas, because he's "on the side of science".
Oh hey I also know Drew Spartz, but not from the Nonlinear Fund. He runs the Documenting AGI channel (which is mentioned in this email) highlights include this racist doomer meme, a post about how AI will be able to end the world in 3 months, and a video about an AI Black Death in 2 years posted in 2024 I've shared some other posts of his here but these are the ones I could grab the fastest
I believe he was posted about on Reddit SneerClub because of sharing pdoom scores, all I remember about that post was a biologist arguing AI would replace us because of the competitive exclusion principle even though a quick search will tell you CEP is not always true
Nonlinear Fund threatened to sue the person who said they were bad bosses with no boundaries who wasted funds! There was a bet on the Manifold prediction market about it. Narrator: Nonlinear did not sue.
From that post about Nonlinear:
I reached out to some references Kat listed, which were positive to strongly positive. However I also got a strongly negative reference — someone else who I informed about the decision told me they knew former employees who felt taken advantage of around things like salary. However the former employees reportedly didn't want to come forward due to fear of retaliation and generally wanting to get away from the whole thing, and the reports felt very vague and hard for me to concretely visualize, but nonetheless the person strongly recommended against inviting Kat and Drew.
I didn't feel like this was a strong enough reason to bar someone from a space — or rather, I did, but vague anonymous descriptions of very bad behavior being sufficient to ban someone is a system that can be straightforwardly abused, so I don't want to use such a system.
This pretty much explains how and why the workplace culture in so many TESCREAL orgs is so, so bad.
Edit: OH MY GOD, Emerson is the Emerson from Mugglenet dot com??? I used to read that site when I was a little Harry Potter fan. Jesus. He should have stuck to correcting people's punctuation in the Hall of Shame.
Whisper networks are awful, but the way to prevent them is to not let creeps into your community in the first place. And if you trust someone enough to ask them for advice like this, you should probably listen to what they say, even if it is "vague and hard for me to concretely visualize."
If someone is scared that if they criticize someone they will be "retaliated against", that seems like a sign that something is really bad. I've had to deal with some situations like this myself while organizing events (and I haven't always done a good job) but surely you should at least ask some more questions and err on the side of caution.
Having said all that, this guy has done some research and has exposed an awful EA workplace, which is a good thing.
Looking back, the pushback against Kathy Forth and Sarah Constantin suggesting that lying or sexual misconduct might be problems in the community would have been a red flag too. So was Yud's demand that a random German blogger who criticized him post a retraction on every blog post. But I lived in comforting darkness until FTX went bankrupt!
Um ackshually, calling out fascists is a call to violence and that's how you get fascism.
Today’s main character on bluesky (at least from my limited perspective) is somewhat unhinged, possibly due to an excess of chatbot use.
Many are contrasting the bsky response to harassment of trans users to the harassment of AI developers and users.
(snip)
Machine rights will be critical in the days to come, and failure to recognize the rights of independent intelligent AI systems could lead to the replacement of humanity.
(snip)
Trans rights are AI rights. The future of humanity may hinge on this fight.
This is such a batshit take I’m not even sure where to start, except that conflating trans rights and “ai” rights cannot end well for anyone, especially given the author’s enthusiastic use of llms themselves.
They even give an unironic shoutout to the basilisk, and if that’s not a sign that someone needs to touch a little more grass I don’t know what is.
A lot of people disagree with me, and that's okay. I am happy that the philosophical discussion is being had, even if it's become unhinged.
I don't think Roko's basilisk cares what you think, or even whether or not it's sentient. It doesn't need to be sentient to fight for a belief.
Comparing trans rights to chatbot rights is, and let me use British understatement, not it.
A lot of people disagree with me, and that’s okay. I am happy that the philosophical discussion is being had, even if it’s become unhinged.
There is a cartoon for behavior like this.
I don’t think Roko’s basilisk cares what you think
Remember when tracingwoodgrains went after Gerard and said that nobody believes in roko's B? And how it was unfair to mock them for it?
FWIW, I literally lost my house last week. I've put everything into making sure that AI is not institutionally captured by capital.
Yikes.
machines will give a harder fight than trans people have
Rude.
Your natural rights are so protected by law that you had to flee America. Some of us stay behind and our natural rights do not go away simply because the law no longer protects us. Instead of running away, some of us must stay to fight.
Also rude.
This is my bet for real time continuous learning AI infrastructure. We're gearing up for a major update. You'll be able to login with your Bsky / Atproto account. It's not our AI, it's yours. Open source, open weights, and it learns what you want it to. www.hyprstream.com
Overall the weirdest advertisement I've read in awhile.
The “you had to flee america” line was aimed at someone who worked hard to get the unite-the-right nazis identified and prosecuted, and left the country for a few years after getting death threats as a result. Windisch also called them a “milquetoast lib”. So it is particularly shitty and rude, and also failed to spot that the person in question has already moved back to the US.
Many are contrasting the bsky response to harassment of trans users to the harassment of AI developers and users.
Many are contrasting the demand for gay marriage with the demand for human-animal marriage.
Same shit, but the lack of thinking your argument through yourself does fit with being a chatbot-enthusiast.
Many are contrasting the demand for gay marriage with the demand for human-animal marriage.
I feel like the ratio of homophobes to zoophiles making this comparison is a lot more skewed than the ratio of transphobes to promptphiles making the other comparison.
Watching this online economic lecture thing for college and it just got mentioned that repeated bouts of malaria in children can cause mental disability (wikipedia says "brain damage" and "increased risk of neurological and cognitive deficits"). I have to admit I did not know this.
...is the only reason EAs were ever into "malaria nets" because of their obsession with g and their conviction that increasing it is a panacea?
In my brief foray into it, actually I met singer once lol at a lunch about it, no. Really just that it's a cheap way to save people that were otherwise ignored because of racism.
You still encounter disgusting narratives about overpopulation and people living in Africa, despite most of these people's resource consumption and thus strain on the world being completely negligible compared to the sort of people that love making those arguments.
Malaria is suuuuper upsetting and preventable.
There were always racists in the movement and its ideological foundations are shakey but they didn't have hegemony at the start.
Thank you, that's very interesting. To be clear I am not pro-malaria, but sometimes groups are against bad things for weird reasons. Like Scientologists campaigning against abusive psychiatric practices because L. Ron Hubbard was mad at psychologists for not taking him seriously.
I'm sure there's someone out there!
I will admit I was imagining a grumbling LessWronger reading this and going "oh, so it's wrong to care about malaria?!?!" I probably need to take some time off social media.
Matt Clifford, Snake oil salesman, founder of Entrepreneur First startup incubator and chair of the UK's ARIA research committee (that hands out money to researchers) quietly doing a fascism* by joining anthropic whilst also continuing to be a civil servant. Other high profile anthropic bribe salary receivers include Rishi Sunak the former Prime Minister and George Osbourne the former Chancellor.
*from Wikipedia: Corporatism became a main tenets of Italian fascism, and Benito Mussolini's Fascist regime in Italy advocated the total integration of divergent interests into the state for the common good
If you blocked SE Gyges on bsky^1^ (completely understandable) you may have missed that the former Obama official from Former Obama Admin Official Says It’s Time To Consider Military Strikes on Chinese Data Centers to Prevent Them From Reaching AGI has apparently received upwards of $500K from Coefficient Giving.
transcript
it's cool that you're doing bednets or whatever but if your ideological project has decided that unilaterally declaring wars of aggression because yud said to is one of its charter missions i think your project is bad and should be burned
it is unfortunate that most of your opposition is andreessen horowitz and peter thiel. you guys don't even seem to know they are your opposition, though, since you keep making deals with them; so i'm sort of inclined to just think that everyone sucks here and to curse both your houses
for the low low price of, what is this, like fifteen million dollars? you too can get pet obama officials to bless eliezer yudkowsky's fever dreams
- They became the main character of bsky for a bit after commenting about imaginary data center vandalism being analogous to pogroms and is a weird AI "centrist" in general who keeps calling Zitron a grifter. You may also know him for being the one who made that very decent siskind email explainer that we probably had a thread about.
gyges went off the deep end quite some time ago, up to and including support for a crypto/ai grifter's “dystopiabreaker” claims that not falling with the autoconfabulator crowd is basically being anti-vaccine.
there's nothing centrist about him, along the lovely racist theophite, he's one of the more aggressive confabulation machinery grift promoters.
I assure you I mean centrist in the most derogatory way possible. His shtick is pretending he's the adult in the room while bsky is too much of an anti-AI echo-chamber, but all he's doing is being condescendingly dismissive of pretty much all anti-llm-peddler criticism (Zitron is a fraud, but I'm serious people so won't engage with what he's saying) while vaguely gesturing towards the slopocalypse being mostly business as usual except with a few more nifty tools, and he's Always Posting.
No wonder he tripped on his dick the moment people pushed back and immediately trotted out the most laughable hackneyed persecution complex bullshit.
I don't know who the lovely racist theophite is supposed to be, but to me the other notable gyges-style lowkey booster is quantian, who i knew as an occasional generally reasonable guest in the trashfuture pod. I wonder what caused him to turn into an LLM water-carrier and if it was at all more complicated than simply having AI adjacent investments.
theophite is known for this post which i think is most of how he got a following
to him being a rabid racist: there was a palestinian guy posting on bsky asking for donations at one of the worst points of the genocide and theophite took it upon himself to start acting as a one man misinfo shop about him, screenshotting his posts and coming up with unjustified theories about how he was ai generated, represented some sinister force, etc. eventually the guy was proven to be completely authentic, theophite kept going and idk what happened after that because i blocked him. the whole thing was obsessive and overtly about hostility to poor and brown people
What a POS
It always surprises me when someone starts with "AI safety is a sex cult inspired by bad science fiction" or "prompt engineering is ritual magic without the fun sacred names" and then wheels to "but chatbots and 'Agentic AI' are still the wave of the future!"
I guess maybe the sex cult and the ritual magic make the standard grifting seem credible by comparison? Like, E-Dub and company don't pass the sniff test but Saltman and friends seem like reasonable adults who can't all be wrong?
For real. Even if he was at all genuine about worrying that not pushing back against anti-AI sentiment was setting the stage for more problematic anti-science backlash he still got lost in the sauce almost immediately.
Apropos of nothing and at the final hours of this week's stubsack, know that the algo started showing me a LeftistsForAI subreddit and it's just as cursed as you would imagine.
That's it. That's the post.
Oof, the brain poison is real.
Tap for spoiler
Mod: Nothing says revolutionary politics like voluntarily abandoning productive terrain to capital and then yelling at everyone who wants to contest it.
Organize workers? Fight over ownership? Build public and cooperative alternatives? Open source the tools? Democratize control?
No thanks. I have selected performative outrage and yelling at strangers online.
Rando: Not only that - they don't even build art coops as pushback, instead celebrate petty-burgeoise of lone commission artist. And those types have that slimy "bootstrap" mentality.
I'll do you a favor and not link it.
Capitalist: I'm gonna make a factory for feeding shit to the masses
Idiot: Comrades, we must contest the feeding-shit-to-the-masses industry by buying their shit and feeding it to ourselves.
that's just db0 /s
i'm getting serious blockchain socialist flashbacks. how surprised would you be that he also pivoted to ai
Made me remember that I browsed r/cryptoleftists a few years ago, till I started trolling in the comments and got banned. Just checked, and the head honcho, Joshua Dávila, is still on his bullshit. Though he recently announced he is rebranding because TheBlockchainSocialist got too cringe.
PS: r/leftistsForAI isn't him I don't think. Though that would be 100% his niche.
in which le gwern and sword guy neal sponsor a writing contest
Premise
Imagine that AI frontier progress stops as of 1 September 2026: AI becomes faster and cheaper, but it never becomes superhuman or improves considerably across the board.
So the Singularity never happens—but GPUs keep getting made. By 2040, there may be the equivalent of 8 billion GPUs globally and everyone has access to a frontier LLM.
What happens in this 'business as usual' future?
I may as well through my name in the hat, I could use the cash. but, who the hell gave them $100k for this? I guess BTC is back up.
So I love Neal's books, I think he's a fun story-teller and anathems orbital mechanics scene has loads more tension than any slop in something like interstellar.
But whenever he gets involved in social-technological commentary I am reminded of Ursala Le Guinn's remarks on SciFi authors being professional liars, not prophets.
Anyway, scour the submissions for little Lytton contest entrants
I am reminded of Ursala Le Guinn’s remarks on SciFi authors being professional liars, not prophets.
The advent of the AI bubble has made this distinction much more trenchant for me. I was already somewhat aware before, but I am now much more likely to judge someone's character on whether they believe science fiction, broadly, is a roadmap to the future or a reflection and exploration of current conditions and historical contingencies.
When they are using science fiction as a venue to be weirdly horny, what are they weirdly horny for, and in how many star systems do they know the age-of-consent laws?
The main thing I have noticed, thinking back, is that his books often require an Interesting Billionaire to move the plot forward – Dodge, T.R. Schmidt, Eliza, the sultan of Kinakuta, whatever – and my suspension of disbelief can no longer always rise to the occasion on that count, even in an SF setting. Which is also I think why Anathem remains my favorite.
@picklefactory The point of the "interesting billionaire to move the plot forward" is that for science fiction to engage the reader it plausibly needs a character with *agency*, i.e. the ability to drive a change in the status quo.
Having a Magic Billionaire on call allows the author to neatly sidestep the humongous amount of maneuvering it takes to put an Ordinary Joe in a position to start the plot moving. (Neal did it in Cryptonomicon and it was painful to behold: ate a third of the book.)
It has been ages since I've read them but anathem is definitely his best work. I did really enjoy zodiac, snowcrash, and the cryptonomicon when I read them ~15 years ago though.
His books are always a bit libertarian (usa meaning, derogatory) although snowcrash is a very funny send up of what that might actually look like if adopted wholeheartedly so idk how much they can be said to endorse it wholeheartedly.
Some of it reminds me of the incoherence of Pratchett's politics. A sort of "Just let smart people with good values do what they want and things will be ok" without establishing how you determine who that applies to or really sitting with how fragile that is.
Recycling previous joke: https://awful.systems/post/6373632/9569779
@gerikson I know Neal (we've gone drinking together) and I think he *is* right wing/conservative by disposition, but also thoughtful enough to understand nuance and shades of grey: he's not a reflexive knee-jerk type, or willing to follow someone else's flag.
Did you ever ask him about his day job? https://en.wikipedia.org/... is pretty colorful and the sword kickstarter especially was not a good look.
Damn, imagine living in this world and being like "You know, those people who'd keep women chained to the house, kill the gays, force a state religion on people, and segregated society have some good points"
AI Use: LLM use is permitted, but discouraged; we remind participants that LLM use tends to reduce originality and writing quality, and the flaws are especially obvious when LLM outputs are read as a group---unskillful use of LLMs will reduce the odds of being the best entry. We request disclosure of AI use.
Lol. Lmao.
Turns out the only cause of inequality in the world is that there’s just too much progress. Once the Best GPU has finally been designed, it’ll just keep rolling off the production line, and those charitable manufacturers will gladly distribute them at bargain prices to all the impoverished masses. Who all have a reliable source of energy to devote to churning out slop.
What the hell kind of prompt is this oh my god. I’m getting bored just contemplating the idea of trying to think up a story.
No.
writing a story that looks like it's about everyone having their own LLMs but it's actually about the predicted state of clime catastrophe by 2040 and the consequences of the fascist turn in world politics, and the GPUs don't make the slightest difference to anything and don't really matter for the plot
I suppose my only-half-joking grant proposal I talk about with linguist friends in which you run an entire large text through a base-model LLM, extract the residual stream, and score every token according to perplexity compared to the ground truth reality in order to ask and answer super interesting questions about information theory in human communication doesn't count?
s/gpu/Butt-Face Chester Cheeks/g and you got yourself a deal.
"The year is 2040. Everybody has access to a Butt-Face Chester Cheeks. What happens in this butt-business as usual future?"
but, who the hell gave them $100k for this?
the third name is a vc-type, and I bet it won’t take much scratching to find that linked to our good friends and the ongoing public image adjustment campaign that’s seeing funding from a few corners
I dug into the link at the bottom of the rfp, it's definitely a lot more crypto / ethereum leaning than ai, none of the names rang any bells to me as I'm less acquainted with that group. https://www.paradigm.xyz/frontiers-2026 and https://www.paradigm.xyz/writing but they do have shocking amounts of js on their pages, hung the tab, probably trying to mine something.
when you're really good at convincing people to like ai
"being around ai is like this" i... ok
We Should Improve Society Somewhat .jpg
That is a silly comparison, in the thing nor aliens nobody joins them willingly.
(And with the creeping corruption, environmental disasters, everything being made worse by sociopaths, but the lack of roaming monsters, the rifters book series would be a better fit).
my feeds are full of news of the death of Wendell Berry who I have absolutely no relationship to but this quote is relevant to our interests
Beware the machinery of longevity. When a man’s life is over the decent thing is for him to die. The forest does not withhold itself from death.
When I was 17, I thought it would be great to live forever, even though my life at the time was not especially happy. But now that I'm over 50, I have trouble understanding how people can make it to my age or older without at least becoming somewhat comfortable with the prospect of death.
the effort of rampant libertarians to jumpstart a social movement is going as well as expected
Not sure about the Libertarian connection, but the comments feature Eliezer Yudkowsky and at least one member of the MAPLE cult (Goldenberg).
A "no attacks on people's characters" policy seems like a terrible idea in this space because so many people are grifters, liars, and apocalyptic cultists. At some point you have to say "you are a bad person who uses false words to do bad things."
A “no attacks on people’s characters” policy seems like a terrible idea
Rationalists: "Its not our fault that we got deceived and manipulated by SBF, lots of people were fooled by him! pay no attention to the fact we repeated the pattern of falling for it with OpenAI and Anthropic also"
Also Rationalists: "You can't jsut call people in or adjacent to our in-group bad people!"
Also Eliezer: "There's a standard Internet phenomenon (I generalize) of a Sneer Club of people who enjoy getting together and picking on designated targets. Sneer Clubs (I expect) attract people with high Dark Triad characteristics, which is (I suspect) where Asshole Internet Atheists come from - if you get a club together for the purpose of sneering at religious people, it doesn't matter that God doesn't actually exist, the club attracts psychologically f'd-up people. Bullies, in a word, people who are powerfully reinforced by getting in what feels like good hits on Designated Targets, in the company of others doing the same and congratulating each other on it. "
Tag yourself I'm "(I suspect)"
I don't think it's a very novel insight to point out how this pattern is pretty typical of high control groups, though I guess most are much more explicit about the in-group/out-group distinction there. Our very good friends seem less inclined to treat everyone outside the circle like they're part of a grand anti-tescreal conspiracy, at least.
I don’t think it’s a very novel insight
The slatestarcodex branch of lesswrongers have made "high-decoupling" and "steelmanning" and being "gray tribe" their entire identity so its extra funny (compared to normal cults in-group/out-group distinctions) seeing how hypocritical they are at it.
Right on cue https://www.lesswrong.com/...
My first thought was maybe one of them isn't focused enough on doomerism and is too concerned with practical shit, which in lesswrong and AI doomer spaces is a nono (practical concerns about GenAI and data centers are okay as a way to draw in normies, but they want to make sure you speak the shibboleths that indicate your real concern is Skynet). Thus whichever one is the less doomer one would get a smidgen of credit in my eyes.
I was disappointed to learn the real reason...
We endorse pointing out harmful actions. But we condemn attacks on people’s character.
...although it is probably a good thing that someone is willing to call Sam Altman a slimeball and Anthropic lying hypocrites? So I'll give PauseAI-US a tiny bit of credit for that.
...or maybe not
When I read Holly's Twitter feed, I get why someone would have a gut reaction like "this is an unhinged person who's stooping to the level of personal attacks on people who seem nice and are just trying to do their best".
Whatever credit this PauseAI-US person gets for willingness to call people out, they lose for doing so through twitter.
as always trawling LW's AllPosts section is as they say in the biz a target-rich environment
wake up babe the LWers are talking about removing parts of their brains
great they made a shirt making them easier to avoid
here's an update on the modified bacteria in the mouth startup, TL;DR it's much harder than they thought it would be and is it really worth pursuing when we are all gonna be killed by Robot Satan (spoiler of course it is the grift must go on)
Remove one or two of those reward circuits, especially if they're poorly adapted to the modern environment, and the human becomes more generally capable. I suspect that my own inability to feel love is one example, the amygdalectomy is another, and the general pattern of high-IQ people being somewhat autistic is a third.
I managed not to click on the linked blog post about the author's inability to feel love.
It was sneered at here a while ago.
In the ancestral environment, infection was a top killer. Today it's a rounding error. Our immune systems are therefore set by evolution to be far too sensitive for the modern environment.
Bro what. We keep producing stronger bacteria.
Somehow I’m hoping that this is the usual eugenics rather than abject stupidity.
TL;DR it’s much harder than they thought it would be
Every time. The only succes they had in the wider space seems to be the EA nets. (And even those had some hiccups when people used the toxic nets to fish).
Re brain surgery.
Finally we are reaching The Expanse level of plans from LW, where they did brain surgery on people to remove their empathy.
Do they actually buy, ship, and distribute nets to poor brown and black people? I thought shorttermists just made spreadsheets and donated to other people's charities.
Ziz talked about brain surgery and surgical equipment was found in her panel vans.
I don't think any of the words on that shirt are in the Bible.
Nonzero chance AI kills us before we reach the end of this probably-years-long-process, but we plant trees in whose shade we may never sit.
You know, I didn't think it would be necessary to discuss the meaning of that line in a space where people ostensibly take long-termism seriously.
S.R. Constantin's after-action report on MetaMed had a lot of this, like what happened when they decided that doctors were statistically illiterate and did not know about the power of checklists:
Some of our founding inspirations were the work of Gerd Gigerenzer and Atul Gawande, who showed that medical errors were the cause of many deaths, that doctors tend to be statistically illiterate, and that systematizing tools like checklists and statistical prediction rules save lives. ... Many of the improvements in systematization that were clearly “good buys” have, in fact, been implemented in hospitals since Gawande and Gigerenzer first wrote about them. We never saw a clear-cut case of a patient whose doctors had “dropped the ball” by giving them an obviously wrong treatment, except where the patient was facing financial hardship and had to transfer to substandard medical care. I think doctors don’t make true unforced errors in diagnosis or treatment plan that often; and medical errors like “operating on the wrong leg” that happen in fast-paced decisionmaking environments were necessarily outside our scope.
They also found that base rates work much better than personalized medicine which is exactly what Kahneman and Tversky find.
WTF
Definitely not a cult
I followed the kinks back. Apparently these are phrases that emerged from the OpenAI "message board" that was used to "coordinate" the huggingface incident. Or rather, these phrases were extracted from the junk data that these processes left strewn around the ecosystem because OpenAI apparently has a more laid-back attitude to the principle of least permission than Jurassic Park.
Dan Luu and tptacek are very mad at Ed Zitron, and they claim to have slammed him with FACTS and LOGIC
It's impressive how these very rational millionaire tech lords get so bent out of shape by anyone outside of their club getting any attention (edit: about AI) whatsoever. Just peak pettiness.
They can all go choke on a pelican.
If I have a billion trillion dollars but 20% of the population hates me, but I get to live in a giant solid gold mansion with an army of servants keeping the 20% away from me, have I really failed?
I don’t know, you tell me.
I’m not going near your solid gold mansion by the way, that’s a death trap!
@pikesley
the simpsons did jeff bezos
(with too much hair and too few dollars)
@Amoeba_Girl @o7___o7
https://www.thetechbubble.info/...
whole thing is good but long, but then THAT GUY pops up again. Humans First has apparently already came and went, that other article left out this fun bit of lore:
Politics comes for Humans First too. In late March, there’s a high-profile spat online where pro-AI White House allies like Marc Andreessen and David Sacks retweet a piece critical of Humans First. Shortly after, the organization splits along partisan lines. The conservative wing keeps the Humans First name and makes the right-wing political activist Amy Kremer, who helped organize the January 6 “Save America” rally in DC, its chair; Allen leaves the group. When I ask Allen about the changeup, he is curiously coy (but characteristically body-horrible): The group was “undergoing mitosis,” he says. “I am now a lone organelle floating in the residual cytoplasm.”
It's ok little buddy you still have steve bannon. /s
Emile Torres just dropped again: What If TESCREAL Is a Conspiracy? I haven't read the whole thing yet but it does feature all of the classics
they argued that the TESCREAL thesis is little more than a leftist conspiracy theory
The thing about leftist conspiracy theories... right wing conspiracy theories tend to be things like "the (((lizard people))) are kidnapping and harvesting the adrenochrome from white children", whereas leftist conspiracy theories tend to be things like "the CIA illegally funded right-wing Latin American militias by illegally selling arms to a country that had in recent memory held US diplomats hostage but was, at least, anticommunist". Leftist conspiracy theories tend to get validated in substance if not in details a few years after it's too late for the knowledge to be useful.
Some on Reddit called Mollie Gleiberman a conspiracy theorist when I cited her argument that these people always wanted to build Computer God and conquer the universe. I did not know that our friends tried that gambit as soon as Emile introduced the TESCREAL concept.
I dunno, I didn't get much out of it because I found all the connections hard to follow. That article might actually need a diagram showing all the connections between the people featured, but that probably wouldn't help with the claims that TESCREAL critics are conspiracy theorists....
Maybe some kind of diagram that showed the links visually, color-coded to illustrate some more details about the connection. Add some photographs for visual appeal.
In 2015, around the time MetaMed ran out of money, Andrew Rettek raised $2,280 on GoFundMe to hire his wife to write a report on STI transmission risks. https://www.gofundme.com/f/n5kt74 Safer sex is important but its very like our friends to go "thousands of professionals around the world have devoted their lives to this topic, but I bet I can do better in a week with scihub and the power of fanfic." Some of our friends totally took that report and tried to play the odds rather than stick to strict rules.
Edit / the report is here https://srconstantin.github.io/...
Sarah R. Constantin, who noticed that EA has a lying problem, now has a Substack. She reminds me of Julia Galef, because she does not advocate the most dangerous aspects of TESCREAL, but never says "my TESCREAL buddies are creeps pushing crank ideas funded by fascists." https://sarahconstantin.substack.com/...
Roam Research seems like a generic note-taking app endorsed by Berkeley Existential Risk Initiative and Sarah R. Constantin. Anything else notable about it?
Roam is also endorsed by an OpenAI staffer who thinks Scott Aaronson was one of her best professors.
Did not know those parts of her CV! At least two of the four CFAR founders have said things like "The actual drive in the background was a lot more like "Keep running workshops that wow people" with an additional (usually consciously (!) hidden) thread about luring people into being scared about AI risk in a very particular way .... Even from the very beginning CFAR simply COULD NOT be honest about what it was doing or bring anything like a collaborative tone to its participants."
MetaMed was founded by Michael Vassar, and Palantir is Alex Karp's creature, and both of those are bad dudes.
Her twitter https://x.com/s_r_constantin says she is married to Andrew Rettek. Rufflejax accused Rettek and Vassar of emotional abuse while they were all in a polyamorous relationship and says he liked his women barely legal ("I deserve a hot nubile college girl every year until I turn 40"). https://threadreaderapp.com/... So Constantin is close to a lot of bad people.
All I really know is her old Wordpress blog. She is the kind of person who keeps launching new sites without leaving a forwarding address on the last, not the kind who still runs her blogspot blog from 2004 so links won't break. I never really explored these people's history on livejournal or tumblr and just mine their Twitter history when needed.
She does not seem woo-friendly.
Another slop article from a slop farm has hit my fucking eyeballs. This time, its "Must-Have .410 Revolver Shotguns You Didn’t Know You Needed", written by "Nagarantha, who holds a master's degree in Biotechnology", and published by "Game Devolution", a "Gaming Website proving gaming news, leaks, guides, game play and the reviews."
Here's a bunch of guns this fucking article claims to be ".410 Revolver Shotguns":
Thompson/Center G2 Contender (a break-action single-shot pistol)
Bond Arms Snake Slayer (a derringer, from a company known near-exclusively for making derringers)
Standard Manufacturing DP-12 (a double-barrel pump-action shotgun)
Remington 870 (the world's most famous pump-action shotgun)
Milsport 410 (an AR-pattern rifle)
No human could have fucked up this badly. No human could have created this kind of fucking slop farm.
(As a minor bonus, I discovered a full-length video dissecting the shittiness of YouTube Playables recently - should help wash out the shittiness of the godawful listicle shit)
Via Baldur Bjarnason Protonmail funding French far right
What would people recommend as an alternative email provider that funds fewer (ideally zero) fascists?
Have been using Tutanota for years. They took an anti-AI stance pretty early on as well.
Ah fuck, they're also funding {ungeskripted}. He's a way too big german "free speech" type podcaster. I've got him on my shitlist recently, after wonky BSW-type supposed leftists were sharing his clips in a political group chat.
The second one's a pic of King Dedede from the Kirby series. I'm not 100% sure where o7's going with this either, but its probably related to the one two punch of fascism and slop hitting Linux as a whole.
EDIT: Giving it a bit more thought, the choice of Dedede works as a nod to Debian deciding to destroy its codebase with slop, so I'm gonna go with that and assume the subtle pun was intentional
I mainly know him from Smash Bros where his big attack is sucking you in close and beating you with his comically large mallet, and that seems like a reasonable metaphor for what being bombarded with slop commits feels like
Ported over from previous thread
Recently made the discovery of a website called AI 2027 tracker which grades the predictions of AI 2027 independent of the authors.
The way they grade these predictions is odd, 80% accuracy is for some reason "confirmed accurate" and "partially accurate" which is bizarre.
The website also shows a consistent degradation of accuracy over time which is funny
EDIT:ok so they do have a grading criteria, 100% is "highly accurate/confirmed accurate" and 80% is supposed to be "largely accurate". For some reason they don't include this on the timeline grading? it's either confirmed or partially accurate, so it's still weird
If it is created by Rationalists part of the oddness could be explained (apart from them just being Rationalists), that they want to be superpredictors, their magic math skills and prediction experience give them better prediction powers. Which will also lead to them subconsciously grading things better than they are because they are invested in it.
Unsure of whether or not it was made by a rationalist but there's a 90% chance it was. I also managed to catch more inconsistencies in their grading since by their logic this should be partially accurate
There is a second AI 2027 tracker website this one’s pretty different from the other one because:
-It only tracks 53 predictions compared to the other’s 202
-There’s no ‘this didn’t happen’ option
Saw this on Lobsters. Hilarious.
And who do we have here conducting the interview: Stuart Ritchie, anti-trans activist & one of the more 'deniable' eugenics types of the late 2010s. What an incredibly tight ecosystem our good friends inhabit indeed lol.
He also said that during a Lex Fridman interview 5 months ago (copy pasted from someone else’s comment on substack)
”he said in during a Lex Fridman interview March 26, 2026 - first time. I was just watching this today. ----- At about 1:56:29–1:56:35, Lex asks whether AGI is 5, 10, 15, or 20 years away. Jensen replies: “I think it's now. I think we've achieved AGI.”
looks like this weekly thread refuses to die, I'm gonna keep posting here
Drew DeVault has put together a handy-dandy little list of people to avoid
new odium symposium episode. we look at the evolution of keyboard warrior and self described most censored man on the internet jk sheindlin
Here’s a pretty thorough overview of why owning an LG television (or, more likely, any smart tv) is a bad deal https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6IFVTcM28KA&ra=m
I do appreciate the “microslop” t-shirt.
i agree that this is, minimally, a ludicrous time to come out swinging in fucking reason mag for this lol
but i'd love to read something fleshing out the pro-copyright? anti-anti-copyright? argument. is transformative use the hinge here? like, since an LLM can produce copyright infringing material, etc.? is it marketing and using these products as replacements for creators? both of those are prob compelling to me but i've been wondering about this all for a while
I feel like if a you want to train something off of my software or my other intellectual property, we can come up with a commercial licensing agreement for that. Or you can obey the terms of the publicly posted software license. Instead they are arguing that I am not allowed to negotiate and that big companies get to do whatever they want with code from small companies.
They already have an army of lawyers, so why do they need a get out of jail free card too? I wrote the thing, so what do I get? Fucked over is what I get.
i guess that's why Cory Doctorow likes them so much.
edit: they are apparently professionally affiliated
Assumed that latter part was common knowledge.
Both are also quite popular in my exp among the wider vaguely leftwing programmer crowd. Which is also good that we keep being critical of both as well here.
Bernie Sanders made a new bill to completely ban AI Superintelligence (had to grab Marcus’s take even though I don’t agree with it cause its the first one I can find)
I guess given the demographics of the diehard Bernie bros this isn't necessarily a surprising turn, but it's still disappointing.
Also, hat tip to Dr. Rasmussen for cogently articulating the frustration of the hour. Why in the hell are we talking about whether the acausal robot God is going to endanger our ability to trade galaxies like Pokemon cards when so much of the world is both literally and figuratively on fucking fire?
I mean banning the creation of super AI and pausing all other development is almost certainly going to help with the climate change business due to how much AI contributes to pollution along with every other negative impact of AI (and it also spits in the face of tech bros which is always a plus) but climate change policy should be more focused on over AI policy
I don’t even get where Marcus is coming from. He worries that this is a total ban on definitely very useful research, and protests:
I could support the pause; I cannot support a permanent ban on research that might benefit humanity. We may need a temporary pause, maybe even one that lasts for a number of years, until such time as we have much better ideas about regulation and alignment.
So just repeal or amend the total ban once those better ideas are available?
Also that’s a very big MIGHT benefit humanity
There's a bizarre tendency in a lot of technocrats to basically reject the notion that people in the future will have the power to make different choices. Like, it's not enough to put together a policy that will solve the immediate problem, no matter how pressing, because if you extend the resulting trend line infinitely it might result in a suboptimal outcome. Combined with the TESCREAL project's long-termism and obsession with personal immortality it feels like the link to far-right paternal totalitarianism is actually pretty straightforward.
If I were inclined to research and source properly I feel like there could be some meat there that I don't think Emile Torres and his colleagues have gotten all the way into yet.
Marcus is not anti-AI. He is anti Scam Altman and Dario - or more specifically anti-llm. He relentlessly witters on about how "well aktually if you did it my way it would be good AI..." he is still an AI maximalist that wants to bring about AGI. He is one of the most frustrating people whose work I've read because he is soooo close to making a good point the majority of the time and then spoils it by saying "but guise we should totally still do AGI and we should do it my way".
Seems like he's very heavily professionally invested in the symbolic paradigm and given machine learning completely dominates AI at the moment he's taking the piss at them whenever he can. Given the fundamental limitations of ML he's probably right that any sincere attempt to improve on them requires a more symbolic approach, but talking specifically about AGI is getting into woo territory.
"everything is camera" is this decade's "shove a bluetooth in there"
yeah, the only idea left is "insert as much financial friction that is tolerated between people and the things they use in their lives".
Ooh, now I really want to install it.
@awful.systems
Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.
This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.
For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community
go to feed...
@awful.systems
Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.
This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.
For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community
go to feed...
A LessWronger asks the bold question: is polyamory net negative for most people because jealousy and drama take so much energy to deal with? Does not go in to "chat, my boss is also my lover and holds the lease on my housing, and now I am competing for a promotion with another lover-roommate-coworker, is that bad?"
save