Thanks, I’m broadly aware who the named people are, just not that there was such a prominent pedophilia angle.

Try searching the reddit sneerclub archives for more

No thanks, every time I read about Brent Dill’s sense of heroic responsibility I throw up in my mouth a little.

Here’s the full text:

Fake radical honesty: when a dishonest person self-discloses taboo or undesirable things about themselves, but then omits the worst thing or things. They make themselves look honest and they’re not. This nasty trick ruined my life once. It occurs to me that this ploy may have been used to cover up the miricult scandal (https://archive.is/miricult.com) after a discussion with someone about what happened. A friend said something like that they’d looked into this and the people involved confessed, but only one minor was molested. For some reason this resulted in increased trust. It should not have. Have you seen fake radical honesty anywhere?

For someone not steeped into the lore, why is this important?

karma

Works the same on LessWrong.

sarcophagi would be the opposite of vegetarians

Unrelated slightly amusing fact, sarcophagos is still the word for carnivorous in Greek, the amusing part being that the word for vegetarian is chortophagos and how weirdly close it is to being a slur since it literally means grass eater.

I am easily amused.

The first prompt programming libraries start to develop, along with the first bureaucracies.

I went three layers deep in his references and his references’ references to find out what the hell prompt programming is supposed to be, ended up in a gwern footnote:

They look like the evil twins of the Penny Arcade writers.

It is with great regret that I must inform you that all this comes with a three-hour podcast featuring Scoot in the flesh: 2027 Intelligence Explosion: Month-by-Month Model — Scott Alexander & Daniel Kokotajlo

Imagine insecure smart people yes-anding each other into believing siskind and yud are profound thinkers.

Wish I’d found a non clunky way to work “cult incubator” into that.

It’s pick-me objectivism, only more overtly culty the closer you are to it irl. Imagine scientology if it was organized around AI doomerism and naive utilitarianism while posing as a get-smart-quick scheme.

It’s main function (besides getting the early adopters laid) is to provide court philosophers for the technofeudalist billionaire class, while grooming talented young techies into a wide variety of extremist thought both old and new, mostly by fostering contempt of established epistemological authority in the same way Qanons insist people do their own research, i.e. as a euphemism for only paying attention to ingroup approved influencers.

It seems to have both a sexual harassment and a suicide problem, with a lot of irresponsible scientific racism and drug abuse in the mix.

I hate being reminded that besides phrenology physiognomy is also a thing.

I like how this presupposes that unlike the tendency towards violent crime, pedophilia is equally distributed among all races and skull bump arrangements.

The post is using traditional orthodox frankincense scented machine learning techniques though, they aren’t just asking an LLM.

This is AI from when we were using it to decide if an image is of a dog or a cat, not how to best disenfranchise all creatives.

Could be an SSC type situation: you write an interminable pretend research post in a superficially serious manner on an obviously flawed premise and let the algorithm help it find its audience of mostly people who won’t read it but will be left with the impression that the premise is at least defensible.

This will be made considerably easier once siskind puts it in his regular link roundup with a cheeky comment about how he doesn’t really truly endorse this sort of thing.

His commenters really didn’t like the ‘white’ part.

in order to dissuade hypothetical agents from blackmailing you

There’s also a whole thing with Yud accepting the many worlds interpretation as obvious truth that leads to (some) rationalists believing that getting killed in one timeline helps your surviving parallel selves by bolstering your case of being unblackmailable by said hypothetical agents, who are also from the future, which is why you can’t negotiate with them directly.

thinkers like computer scientist Eliezer Yudkowsky

That’s gotta sting a bit.

birdsite stuff: