28
Nonlinear seem to think this post replying to the accusations about them will make them look like the heroes
(forum.effectivealtruism.org)
this post was submitted on 14 Dec 2023
28 points (100.0% liked)
SneerClub
989 readers
1 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Those are asymptotically approaching "Are we the baddies?" levels of self-awareness.
It almost reads as a threat... 'don't stop our gravy train, or we'll lash out and reveal what we know!'
It was dubious but for me the last sentence crosses the line into it being a threat. I dont get why they include this on their defense post, didn't anybody proofread this and go 'wow this part makes you look really manipulative and the last line is just a threat, as the previous ones show you have the moral capability to do this to your friends, and now you mention you have insider knowledge'. (Also lol, if now somebody drops accusations like this anonymously, the obvious people accused would be them. If they are right and the people accusing them are super accusers who just drop shit on other people for their personal gain they just gave them plausible deniability (I assume their previous employees have access to the same knowledge))
Also: 'so many conflicts in EA', looks like there is more content for us in the future.
This is a 60 minute post. Nobody proofread this. They're hoping few people will read the whole thing, and they're probably right.
Fair, and putting it through my Bayesian calculations I think the chance of it having any type of proofreader is only 11.111% (repeating of course)