I wonder how much of the coder mindset is behind the anarchist diy chemistry biohacking people (which seems to distress people who have actual experience in chemistry).
Another manifesto? Considering the high percentage of people who first write a manifesto and then do a terrorism/shooting I'm now scared.
is keep fining them $500 for noise pollution
If the price of the breaking the law is a fine, etc
there’s this type of reply guy on fedi lately who does the “well actually querying LLMs only happens in bursts and training is much more efficient than you’d think and nvidia says their gpus are energy-efficient” thing whenever the topic comes up
This kind of person (also happened a lot with cryptocurrencies) always goes 'that isn't how it works, this isn't a problem' then doesn't explain what the mistake is you are supposed to have made, and then a few weeks/months/days/search later it is revealed that it was how it works and it is a huge problem. And it is so annoyingly common im very happy with the moderation here.
“my good bitch have you met rationalists”
It can be pretty hard to admit you have been conned, so I figure this is their defense mechanism, pretending that this all is new and not that it has been there from the start. (The hbomberguy skull guy was one of the early LW people for example (9 years, has it been 9 years already?))
Edit: somebody also Did The Math (xcancel) "I eyeballed the rough numbers from your graph then re-plotted it as a linear rather than a logarithmic scale, because they always make me suspicious. You're predicting the effective compute is going to increase about twenty quadrillion times in a decade. That seems VERY unlikely."
One of the problems with the 'alignment problem' is that one group doesn't care about a large part of the possible alignment problems and only cares about theoretical extinction level events and not about already occurring bias, and other issues. This also causes massive amounts of critihype.
Paul never evolved beyond that blog post (Edit: this one, which he wrote when he was 40 years old) he wrote about the poor nerds sadly. And the the whole nerd/jock thing has not really been relevant for ages anyway, superman plays warhammer ffs.
I'm a fan of extreme metal, and I know you cannot just hide behind 'im just singing a song' since I was in my teens (or earlier). I know people often make bad arguments just because they are reaching for anything to try and defend somebody they like/agree with ideologically but this is super duper weak and embarrassing.
Also, apparently it doesn't hold up in court. People have gotten in trouble for 'in minecraft' statements, and at least in the Netherlands saying 'it means all cats are beautiful' still gets you fined for an acab reference to a cop. These are not computer systems where you can go 'I mean B not A beep boop' and the problem disappears in a puff of logic.
As often is the case here on awful systems, both sides are bad. Matt Ridley is a climate change denying shouty british aristocrat person all mad that greenpeace is not admitting there is a possibility windmills might be affecting whales (71 dead ones in the uk last year, no idea about the average of dead wales) (iirc according to research it isn't the windmills it is the increased and intensified ship traffic), if you were wondering why the article is written so badly that it seems like it is written by a dark side sneerclub commenter (aka a focus more on funny sneers than making an solid case, which is fine for this silly site, but he is pretending to be a science reporter).
(Taking the risks of viruses (whatever their origin) is good of course, just deciding that covid is synthetic is sneerworthy, as is only focusing on synthetic viruses because handwave AGI intelligence is magic).
Also note that Matt wrote a book arguing that covid came from a lab, so this article is also just book promotion. (he is also of course, a libertarian).
I was elected to sneer not to read so I'm not spending 23 minutes on that. But I do wonder if you could refurbish large parts of this blog post to argue that masturbation is murder (when cismen do it). One counter argument against this is denying the full moral status of the semen.
"You hate AI art? Well name all real paintings!" the blog post.
Also talking about the urinal "Art, it seems, is most meaningful when it challenges our very concept of what art is." No that was in 1917. Pretty sure that nowadays 'what is art even?' art is quite overdone and boring.