I spoke with Anissimov

When I asked Yiannopolous and Bokhari for comment

Very good job on contacting the most neutral and dispassionate sources as well as both sides.

The Hill, Reason, Quillette, Vox co-founder Matthew Yglesias, Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker, journalist Cathy Young [links bolded]

Very careful use of links there, can't be linking anything with an edit by Gerard.

Wugapodes’ righteous fury

The large wikipedia screenshot is extremely unhinged, in a sea of what I presume are votes saying "Oppose. He cited NYT for this claim and an opinion is not a conflict of interest"

imagine being this butthurt

a brave editor spreads the truth

uh, or not

Without fail in the comments section, we have Daniel Kokotajlo (the philosophy student turned ai safety advocate who recently got canned at OAI) making the claim that "we [ = Young Daniel and our olde friend Big Yud] are AI experts and believe that risking full scale nuclear war over data centers is actually highly rational^{tm}" :)

...anyways, what were we saying about David Gerard being a bad faith actor again?

Well that's a lot of words. It's like someone turned a dispute over editing a page into an biography of the editor. It's that kind if mountain out of a molehill business that has led to me no longer editing Wikipedia.

And the bit if the article that struck home:

He had started out on the internet 20 years before as a passionate partisan for his new tribe and its potential to transform the world. In the intervening decades, though, his optimism had waned.

It's not an uncommon trajectory, it's one I've been on myself, becoming disillusioned by social media. And yet, the Fediverse has given me new hope and enthusiasm.

Cool, it's like any one of the thousands of rightoid whines about wikipedia and then it somehow devolves into even more boring nonsense which I'm not going to read especially since most of it was probably written by an LLM.