3 ms·
>The Rationalist movement is deeply weird. It has curious connections with "race realists" and monarchists. Yes, the rationalist movement is weird, and in some
by scythe 6y ago
>The Rationalist movement is deeply weird. It has curious connections with "race realists" and monarchists.
Yes, the rationalist movement is weird, and in some ways, bad. But Scott Alexander didn't start the rationalist movement and doesn't control it. Holding him responsible for what other people post on his website (that he makes no money from), while Twitter, Reddit, Facebook et al continue to enjoy the complicity of the media in the equally awful discourse there, is just a case of stomping on the little guy because you can.
Insofar as the NYT declared SSC to be "a window into the Silicon Valley psyche", there's a much more obvious candidate forum for that, and you're posting on it.
- jessaustin 6y agoThis is why I wonder about the self-described "HN critics". If they really didn't like HN and wanted to harm it, it would be no trouble to hook a producer or editor at some news media firm on some ridiculous misinterpretation of any number of things said on HN on a regular basis. They could simultaneously leak something misleading to AOC and Josh Hawley to get both sides of the aisle in Congress wound up. Would NYT be frightened by actual SV connections?
- reducesuffering 6y agoThis is actually a prescient point. We're one node away from the rationalist community (as SSC and this article have had huge threads the past couple weeks). Given NYT's blatant guilty-by-association of the rationalist community, and any competence from them would understand that HN has a far bigger impact on SV than the rationalists, I think we're not too far away from a huge slandering NYT piece like this for HN.