They somehow forget that Zelazny‘s accelerationists were pro-technology, but specifically as a tool to smash an elite class that had consolidated all power
I have been locked into some weak version of Stancilism since the Bush elections, where I constantly heard some variation of “I voted for the known liar because he seemed more trustworthy” almost verbatim
Trying to be tolerant here, I think part of this is just selection/survivor bias: all these tech bazillionaires have become super powerful by betting the house that whatever tech they're interested in will wow everybody, so now they do that for their Hail Mary climate solutions
I mean, it's possible the guy is "innocent" in some sense. But if you're running as a Republican in 1866 and you've had a Confederate flag tattoo, or as a civil rights candidate and it turns out your go-to Halloween costume is blackface, that' a dangerous signal that you don't Get It.
Again I say unto you, thou shalt not believe thy information sources are reliable unless they be tested with statistics, research, and reason and some proxy for liability
Again, I’m thinking that we need to have a lot resources available for these people who are being instructed to do things that run counter to their professional training and personal ethics. They deserve it and it helps document the case in a Nuremberg sense.
Read and agree. The sources of slop are so varied & overwhelming that there's no supply side fix. There is desperate need for a WK Clifford-style rule: "it is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence." people.brandeis.edu/~teuber/Clif...
I think Matt (et al) should write a book on this stuff. Include examples, but also sighs and snark. Piss people off, make (little) money, raise profile.
(Rare instance where I think a person has not written enough books. Usually I'm like "Your thoughts and ideas do not justify a book.")
One of the things I think we are relearning in this global surge of authoritarianism is that preferred social and economic policies are not *less important* than we thought but that they are *downstream* of having a freedom-guaranteeing, law-abiding government.
