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.)
OK so the "problem" these people (EAs) are facing is that they are strongly pro-"progress", in that they are very much against any sort of criticism of existing capitalism, but they have identified one specific outcome of this (rampant AI) as very very bad.
That, and only that.
Climate change? Not a problem. Technological neo-feudalism? Not a problem. Global thermonuclear war? Not a problem, will not kill everyone after all. Global pandemic? Same thing, what doesn't kill us will make us stronger.
So a reasonable person will look at current energy demands of GenAI, look at the existing benefits, and make the reasonable conclusion that this is bad and we should stop it. But that's WRONG. Stopping it for those reasons is anti-progress. You can only stop it if it prevents AI takeover.
Cf. smarm-meister Zvi, who can't understand why people don't want datacenters when they don't want coal plants slightly less, and cites fuckin' Cremieux as a lede:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/EDKw7KyonrvskqZ7o/the-american-people-really-hate-data-centers
Here's an example
Well yeah transmission lines are fucking ugly, and most people, when asked if they want something fucking ugly built near them will say "heck no". Sure, imagining that transmissions lines cause cancer is false, but it's an easy thing to believe when the people building the lines are energy companies, who people hate because they're expensive and cause wildfires. Also I bet dollars to donuts that Zvi doesn't live near a transmission line.
He "knows" transmissions lines are good, because they get power to his home, and he figures because he wants power, it's good, and everyone should just be happy to have a high-voltage line near their home because that brings him power. It's remarkably un-empathetic.
But let's take a step back. Isn't opposition to data centers good for preventing AGI? NO, it's not, it's Luddism! You have to accept data centers because they are good for capitalism now, but IF they start to produce the Robot God, THEN they're bad.
It's an incoherent position and it's so fun to watch these people turn themselves into pretzels over it.
Dude hasn't been around. I've noticed quite a bit of anxiety around even terminal-supply transmission lines adjacent to new-build neighborhoods in wildfire risk zones. I'll agree that this is irrational; the big problem is people were persuaded to buy a house in a fire zone because a big landowner and a developer wanted to cash out some marginal land, but there is a degree of actual rationality here. People feel that a big, most likely the biggest, chunk of their personal wealth is at risk. Calling that "straight up moral panic" is ignoring how real people actually rationally calculate risks, and ignoring potential opportunities to help them improve, if that's really what you want to do.
But we already knew that Zvi was a disingenuous idiot, so I digress.