this post was submitted on 01 Nov 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

SneerClub

1011 readers
2 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I haven't read the whole thread yet, but so far the choice line is:

I like how you just dropped the “Vance is interested in right authoritarianism” like it’s a known fact to base your entire point on. Vance is the clearest demonstration of a libertarian the republicans have in high office. It’s an absurd ad hominem that you try to mask in your wall of text.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago

This hits a lot worse after JD Vance became Vice-Pres Elect

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago

Ok now where does this fit on my red string chart that links david gerard to X Æ A-Xii/Techno Mechanicus

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

JD Vance is probably among us as we speak. He could be any username…

Is he you?

I wish, but no.

me

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Downvoting because this is a link to Reddit instead of the original source.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago

The point was SSCers reacting. Vance being an SSCer isn't notable as he's a Thiel creature. SSCers being confronted with the eyeshadowed mirror that is Vance is much more interesting because they spend a lot of time being nominally not exactly what Vance is.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago

Downvoting because you are a dorkus

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (2 children)

your lack of situational awareness is alarming. stop driving, grab a coffee, put your feet up, and take a moment to actually fucking look at what you replied to

it may help

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (5 children)

The situation is that we should always link to the source, not to another aggregator. This decreases the odds of it becoming a dead link. And that's before even dealing with the issue that people here are typically explicitly avoiding Reddit.

Then add in that the linked video is a full 3 hours of a Joe Rogan video and no time stamp was provided to tell us what we should be looking for. I'd downnvote a second time just for that if I could.

The problem isn't me, it's a lack of awareness on your part.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago

the problem is that you post things here, though i guess that by the time i'm commenting it has been alleviated.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Look who AIs self confidence was modeled after.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago

this has me howling with laughter, thanks

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

holy fuck how are you like this

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

"is it me, driveby poster, that is wrong? no, it must be everyone else who knows the sub that's wrong"

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

like the thing I can’t figure out is, what in the fuck did they think we were quoting and reacting to?

actually nah I can figure it out, they saw a link to reddit and decided they had a cake to shit on

and as everyone knows, you can’t cut off a cake shit mid-log

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago

what I appreciate (inasfar as something to laugh at) is that when this is pointed out they double down like it's their life savings riding on the game

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago

this isn’t wikipedia, and the point of this post was not in fact the thing you think it was, you utter and complete raging fuckwit

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

The point of this post is ssc. Not vance. The problem is you.

Sneerclub is a point and laugh at the radicalizing Rationlists place not complain about the gop place. (And if you dont know what that is read the rationalwiki (not related to the Rationalists) on lesswrong).

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

imagine our drivebys reading the description for the place they ~~drop one out~~ post in

difficulty: impossible

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago

But the description is like 1/1024th of a ssc post. Who has time for that.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Or people could take away different things, especially since post-2014 (?) Scott approaches controversial issues much more cautiously and deliberately made known (Kolmogorov) that he was never going to fully honest around certain topics, inviting (deliberately or not, accurate or not) Straussian readings.

Ugh. These people seem sad and they make me sad.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

What is controversial about Kolmogorov.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm pretty sure they're referencing an old ssc post on "kolmogorov complicity" - referencing the Soviet scientist who either spoke out against the purges and got gulag'd or who realized that they were bad but didn't say anything to avoid getting gulag'd and tried to protect his peers from the same fate. I forget if he was the example to follow or the counterexample, and I can't be arsed to look it up.

Now imagine if instead of a Soviet citizen trying to steer your people away from stalinism you were a fascist living in a broadly progressive culture looking to steer the world away from liberalism and towards Yarvin and friends. I try not to go down the conspiracy rabbit hole, but I'm not sure how Scott's output meaningfully differs from what such a person would write. Honestly if he hasn't written the kolmogorov complicity post outlining the whole concept I don't know if I'd be more or less inclined to think he's doing it actively.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Self-reply because a few hours later I could be arsed after all, and what I found was confusing.

To start with, this wasn't a scooter original; it was a response to a post by a different Scott A, and according to a very brief examination (I read both the Wikipedia article and the talk page) it looks like it's based on some questionable history. The story is that Andrey Kolmogorov kept quiet and used his influence to shelter Jewish academics and others from persecution under the purges. However, the most noteworthy example of his actions during the purges were his active testimony in the prosecution of his doctoral advisor, Nikolas Luzin. There's some ambiguity about why he participated but the two theories appear to be that the cops forced him to do it by blackmailing him about a (historically disputed/unconfirmed) gay relationship he was in or that the whole thing was driven by personal animosity between Luzin and his students. Notably after being convicted it seems like Luzin wasn't enough of a threat to Stalin to actually be properly disappeared or even fully removed from academia.

I don't know enough about the relevant history to make a reasonable determination as to who's right, but it's telling that neither story meaningfully supports the idea that the Scotts seem to be pitching of keeping your head down and muddling through to protect you and yours under authoritarianism. If that "Kolmogorov Option" exists it's only because you're in a decently liberal society. Otherwise the authoritarian power of the state will be used against you either for their own purpose or as a tool by whoever can catch their ear and doesn't like you, and all your attempts to avoid being the nail that sticks out will have been pointless.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If that “Kolmogorov Option” exists it’s only because you’re in a decently liberal society.

This would be very damning for what Scott is saying and implying here. (yes, im going a bit more conspiratorial here, esp considering his like of NRx (can't recall if the leaked emails are around this period, but I feel like they were a few years later)), but I doubt Scott did that much research or read that deeply into it.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago

In general I find the least charitable explanations of any of Alexander's behavior to be the most plausible

load more comments
view more: next ›