19

Have a sneer percolating in your system but not enough time/energy to make a whole post about it? Go forth and be mid - welcome to the Stubsack, your first port of call for learning fresh Awful you’ll near-instantly regret.

Any awful.systems sub may be subsneered in this subthread, techtakes or no.

If your sneer seems higher quality than you thought, feel free to cut’n’paste it into its own post — there’s no quota for posting and the bar really isn’t that high.

The post Xitter web has spawned so many “esoteric” right wing freaks, but there’s no appropriate sneer-space for them. I’m talking redscare-ish, reality challenged “culture critics” who write about everything but understand nothing. I’m talking about reply-guys who make the same 6 tweets about the same 3 subjects. They’re inescapable at this point, yet I don’t see them mocked (as much as they should be)

Like, there was one dude a while back who insisted that women couldn’t be surgeons because they didn’t believe in the moon or in stars? I think each and every one of these guys is uniquely fucked up and if I can’t escape them, I would love to sneer at them.

(Credit and/or blame to David Gerard for starting this. Apologies for not getting the previous one up - my old laptop died)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] gerikson@awful.systems 10 points 1 day ago

enjoy this rightwinger employing multiple rightwing tropes to decry that "AI safety" is viewed as leftwing:

https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/Rx38cuCpL9hguLCDq/for-love-of-the-lightcone-don-t-partisanize-ai-safety

it's all of course framed in the most parochially US-centric terms possible, and Extremely Online as well

maybe this grand project is undermined by the following exchange in the comments

niknoble: "It's been interesting to see slowdown advocates worried about partisanization, when that is also a big worry of mine as an accelerationist. [...]

reply by Hide "Why are you an accelerationist? Are you not concerned about everyone on earth being killed?"

reply to Hide by O O: "If you believe there’s low odds for doom, it’s a rational position."

Good luck, safety advocates.

[-] scruiser@awful.systems 2 points 9 hours ago

The exchange with niknoble in the comments was also my favorite. He notes the democrat party is actually the best bet for getting regulation on AI:

More generally, acceleration wins by default if everyone follows their local financial incentives, and the only force I've seen overpower capital at scale is the will of the Democratic Party of the United States.

He is maybe giving Democrat too much credit, but yeah, if the doomers were really trying to win, they should be looking at the party that at least has a chance of agreeing to more regulations.

[-] Architeuthis@awful.systems 5 points 6 hours ago

if the doomers were really trying to win, they should be looking at the party that at least has a chance of agreeing to more regulations.

It's possible for a gaggle of self important dollar store machiavellis to land on Trump being the surer bet because he openly takes bribes and they have money, forgetting that when he takes the money their leverage ends because they are not the mafia.

[-] Amoeba_Girl@awful.systems 6 points 1 day ago

“If you believe there’s low odds for doom, it’s a rational position.”

What! No it’s not! It’s low odds of an infinitely bad outcome! How have you managed not to actually learn anything worth learning from Pascal’s wager?

[-] rhamph@awful.systems 7 points 1 day ago

But don’t forget the infinitely bad outcome of delaying the uncountable emulated superbeings by one second

this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2026
19 points (100.0% liked)

TechTakes

2698 readers
367 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS