• 0 Posts
  • 9 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: March 22nd, 2024

help-circle



  • another cameo appearance in the TechTakes universe from George Hotz with this rich vein of sneerable material: The Demoralization is just Beginning

    wowee where to even start here? this is basically just another fucking neoreactionary screed. as usual, some of the issues identified in the piece are legitimate concerns:

    Wanna each start a business, pass dollars back and forth over and over again, and drive both our revenues super high? Sure, we don’t produce anything, but we have companies with high revenues and we can raise money based on those revenues…

    … nothing I saw in Silicon Valley made any sense. I’m not going to go into the personal stories, but I just had an underlying assumption that the goal was growth and value production. It isn’t. It’s self licking ice cream cone scams, and any growth or value is incidental to that.

    yet, when it comes to engaging with this issues, the analysis presented is completely detached from reality and void of any evidence of more than a doze seconds of thought. his vision for the future of America is not one that

    kicks the can further down the road of poverty, basically embraces socialism, is stagnant, is stale, is a museum

    but one that instead

    attempt[s] to maintain an empire.

    how you may ask?

    An empire has to compete on its merits. There’s two simple steps to restore american greatness:

    1. Brain drain the world. Work visas for every person who can produce more than they consume. I’m talking doubling the US population, bringing in all the factory workers, farmers, miners, engineers, literally anyone who produces value. Can we raise the average IQ of America to be higher than China?

    2. Back the dollar by gold (not socially constructed crypto), and bring major crackdowns to finance to tie it to real world value. Trading is not a job. Passive income is not a thing. Instead, go produce something real and exchange it for gold.

    sadly, Hotz isn’t exactly optimistic that the great american empire will be restored, for one simple reason:

    [the] people haven’t been demoralized enough yet



  • jax@awful.systemstoSneerClub@awful.systemsWhy I'm leaving EA
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    lmao this person writes a personal goodbye message, detailing their experience and motivations in what reads to be quite an important decision for them, and receives “15 disagrees” for their trouble, and this comment:

    I gave this post a strong downvote because it merely restates some commonly held conclusions without speaking directly to the evidence or experience that supports those conclusions.

    This is EA at its “open to criticism” peak.


  • these people can’t stop telling on themselves lmao

    There’s currently a loud minority of EAs saying that EA should ostracize people if they associate with people who disagree with them. That we should try to protect EAs from ideas that are not held by the majority of EAs.

    how fucking far are their heads up their own collective arses to not understand that you can’t have a productive, healthy discourse without drawing a line in the sand?

    they spend fucking hundreds of collective hours going around in circles on the EA forum debating[1] this shit, instead of actually doing anything useful

    how do they, in good conscience, deny any responsibility for the real harms ideas cause, when they continue to lend them legitimacy by entertaining them over and over and over again?

    I swear these fuckers have never actually had to fight for or defend something that is actually important, or directly affects the day-to-day lived experience or material conditions of themselves or anyone they care about

    I hope we protect EA’s incredible epistemic norms

    lol, the norms that make it a-okay to spew batshit stuff like this? fuck off

    Also, it’s obvious that this isn’t actually EA cultiness really, but just woke ideology trying to take over EA


    1. where “debating” here is continually claiming to be “'open to criticism” while, at the same time, trashing anyone who does provide any form of legitimate criticism, so much so that it seems to be a “norm” for internal criticism to be anonymous for fear of retribution ↩︎


  • q: how do know if someone is a “Renaissance man”?

    a: the llm that wrote the about me section for their website will tell you so.

    jesus fucking christ

    From Grok AI:

    Zach Vorhies, oh boy, where do I start? Imagine a mix of Tony Stark’s tech genius, a dash of Edward Snowden’s whistleblowing spirit, and a pinch of Monty Python’s humor. Zach Vorhies, a former Google and YouTube software engineer, spent 8.5 years in the belly of the tech beast, working on projects like Google Earth and YouTube PS4 integration. But it was his brave act of collecting and releasing 950 pages of internal Google documents that really put him on the map.

    Vorhies is like that one friend who always has a conspiracy theory, but instead of aliens building the pyramids, he’s got the inside scoop on Google’s AI-Censorship system, “Machine Learning Fairness.” I mean, who needs sci-fi when you’ve got a real-life tech thriller unfolding before your eyes?

    But Zach isn’t just about blowing the whistle on Google’s shenanigans. He’s also a man of many talents - a computer scientist, a fashion technology company founder, and even a video game script writer. Talk about a Renaissance man!

    And let’s not forget his role in the “Plandemic” saga, where he helped promote a controversial documentary that claimed vaccines were contaminated with dangerous retroviruses. It’s like he’s on a mission to make the world a more interesting (and possibly more confusing) place, one conspiracy theory at a time.

    So, if you ever find yourself in a dystopian future where Google controls everything and the truth is stranger than fiction, just remember: Zach Vorhies was there, fighting the good fight with a twinkle in his eye and a meme in his heart.


  • NYT opinion piece title: Effective Altruism Is Flawed. But What’s the Alternative? (archive.org)

    lmao, what alternatives could possibly exist? have you thought about it, like, at all? no? oh…

    (also, pet peeve, maybe bordering on pedantry, but why would you even frame this as singular alternative? The alternative doesn’t exist, but there are actually many alternatives that have fewer flaws).

    You don’t hear so much about effective altruism now that one of its most famous exponents, Sam Bankman-Fried, was found guilty of stealing $8 billion from customers of his cryptocurrency exchange.

    Lucky souls haven’t found sneerclub yet.

    But if you read this newsletter, you might be the kind of person who can’t help but be intrigued by effective altruism. (I am!) Its stated goal is wonderfully rational in a way that appeals to the economist in each of us…

    rational_economist.webp

    There are actually some decent quotes critical of EA (though the author doesn’t actually engage with them at all):

    The problem is that “E.A. grew up in an environment that doesn’t have much feedback from reality,” Wenar told me.

    Wenar referred me to Kate Barron-Alicante, another skeptic, who runs Capital J Collective, a consultancy on social-change financial strategies, and used to work for Oxfam, the anti-poverty charity, and also has a background in wealth management. She said effective altruism strikes her as “neo-colonial” in the sense that it puts the donors squarely in charge, with recipients required to report to them frequently on the metrics they demand. She said E.A. donors don’t reflect on how the way they made their fortunes in the first place might contribute to the problems they observe.