I haven’t looked into the Zizians in a ton of detail even now, among other reasons because I do not think attention should be a reward for crime.
And it doesn’t occur to him to look into the Zizians in order to understand how cults keep springing up from the group he is a major thought leader in? Like if it was just one cult, I would sort of understand the desire just to shut ones eyes (but it certainly wouldn’t be a truth-seeking desire), but they are like the third cult (or 5th or 6th if we are counting broadly cult-adjacent group) (and this is not counting the entire rationalist project as cult). (For full on religious cults we have: leverage research, and the rationalist-Buddhist cult; for high-demand groups we have: the Vassarites, Dragon Army’s group home, and a few other sketchy group living situations (Nonlinear comes to mind)).
I read the Sequences and all I got was this lousy thread about the glomarization of Eliezer Yudkowsky’s BDSM practices
Serious sneer in the replies
this seems like a good time to point folks towards my articles titled “That Time Eliezer Yudkowsky recommended a really creepy sci-fi book to his audience and called it SFW” and "That Time Eliezer Yudkowsky Wrote A Really Creepy Rationalist Sci-fi Story and called it PG-13
Didnt the zizians also literally protest one of his events and got arrested for that? Or was that a different group they were protesting. Seems weird to not look them up at all. Very ‘ideological turing test’ failure levels.
Also funny that his logic would mean he doesnt look into Nelson Mandela.
E: also iffy he tosses the animal rights people (partially) under the bus for no reason. EA animal rights will love that.
Yeah, his rational is something something “threats” something something “decision theory”, which has the obvious but insane implication that you should actually ignore all protests (even peaceful protestors that meet his lib centrist ideals of what protests ought to be) because that is giving into the protestors “threats” (i.e. minor inconveniences, at least in the case of lib-brained protests) and thus incentivizing them to threaten you in the first place.
he tosses the animal rights people (partially) under the bus for no reason. EA animal rights will love that.
He’s been like this a while, basically assuming that obviously animals don’t have qualia and obviously you are stupid and don’t understand neurology/philosophy if you think otherwise. No, he did not even explain any details of his certainty about this.
And it doesn’t occur to him to look into the Zizians in order to understand how cults keep springing up from the group he is a major thought leader in? Like if it was just one cult, I would sort of understand the desire just to shut ones eyes (but it certainly wouldn’t be a truth-seeking desire), but they are like the third cult (or 5th or 6th if we are counting broadly cult-adjacent group) (and this is not counting the entire rationalist project as cult). (For full on religious cults we have: leverage research, and the rationalist-Buddhist cult; for high-demand groups we have: the Vassarites, Dragon Army’s group home, and a few other sketchy group living situations (Nonlinear comes to mind)).
Also, have an xcancel link, because screw Elon and some of the comments are calling Eliezer out on stuff: https://xcancel.com/allTheYud/status/1989825897483194583#m
Funny sneer in the replies:
Serious sneer in the replies
Convenience links:
https://www.polemics.md/that-time-eliezer-yudkowsky-recommended-a-really-creepy-sci-fi-book-to-his-audience/ (https://awful.systems/post/2972738)
https://www.polemics.md/that-time-eliezer-yudkowsky-wrote-a-rationalist-sci-fi-2/
Do you mean the retweets or actual replies? Because I’m not seeing any replies to his comment, even in xcancel.
It’s in the quote tweets.
I found those quote searching xcancel for Eliezer Yudkowsky
Didnt the zizians also literally protest one of his events and got arrested for that? Or was that a different group they were protesting. Seems weird to not look them up at all. Very ‘ideological turing test’ failure levels.
Also funny that his logic would mean he doesnt look into Nelson Mandela.
E: also iffy he tosses the animal rights people (partially) under the bus for no reason. EA animal rights will love that.
Yeah, his rational is something something “threats” something something “decision theory”, which has the obvious but insane implication that you should actually ignore all protests (even peaceful protestors that meet his lib centrist ideals of what protests ought to be) because that is giving into the protestors “threats” (i.e. minor inconveniences, at least in the case of lib-brained protests) and thus incentivizing them to threaten you in the first place.
He’s been like this a while, basically assuming that obviously animals don’t have qualia and obviously you are stupid and don’t understand neurology/philosophy if you think otherwise. No, he did not even explain any details of his certainty about this.