34
all 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] gerikson@awful.systems 17 points 6 months ago

Surprised they didn't just do the agile thing and seek direct financial support from Peter Thiel.

[-] titotal@awful.systems 24 points 6 months ago

Oxford instituted a fundraising freeze. They knew the org could have gotten oodles funding from any number of strange tech people, they disliked it so much they didn't care.

[-] YouKnowWhoTheFuckIAM@awful.systems 15 points 6 months ago

I wonder how much they disliked it and how much they felt it was just using the Oxford brand and cheapening it. Only a slight but a qualitative difference. You can pump out all the awful shit you want at Oxford, but cheapen the brand with the increasingly zany antics of your dorky club and they might at least look twice.

[-] AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space 9 points 6 months ago

Has Oxford gone after the Scientologists calling their personality quiz the “Oxford Capacity Assessment” or something similar?

[-] o7___o7@awful.systems 9 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

That's named after Oxford, MS, wink wink

[-] YouKnowWhoTheFuckIAM@awful.systems 7 points 6 months ago

I would guess that their personal reach over the name is pretty limited by a number of factors, including that the town itself has quite a significant similar claim itself. “Oxford Brookes” university, for example, is not a part of Oxford the Ancient University, but it certainly helps their brand to be next door (and as far as I know it’s a perfectly fine institution as far as these things go).

The issue with the Future of Humanity Institute would be almost the other way around: that as long as it’s in-house, the university can hardly dissociate themselves from it.

[-] dgerard@awful.systems 3 points 6 months ago

formerly Oxford Polytechnic, then universitised in 1992

[-] gerikson@awful.systems 8 points 6 months ago

I mean they could have cut ties entirely with Oxford.

[-] jlow@beehaw.org 6 points 6 months ago

Philisophers have kafkaesque bureaucracy? Weird.

[-] mawhrin@awful.systems 8 points 6 months ago

two things: one, limited bureaucracy is not only good, it's required for an institution to thrive. second, we only have bostrom's word on the reasons, and i wouldn't trust the motherfucker even with grating cheese (that is other colour than white).

[-] YouKnowWhoTheFuckIAM@awful.systems 5 points 6 months ago

Yes, but that’s not relevant here

this post was submitted on 20 Apr 2024
34 points (100.0% liked)

SneerClub

983 readers
27 users here now

Hurling ordure at the TREACLES, especially those closely related to LessWrong.

AI-Industrial-Complex grift is fine as long as it sufficiently relates to the AI doom from the TREACLES. (Though TechTakes may be more suitable.)

This is sneer club, not debate club. Unless it's amusing debate.

[Especially don't debate the race scientists, if any sneak in - we ban and delete them as unsuitable for the server.]

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS