Some good points here in criticizing utilitarianism. But the dividing into "geeks, noobs and sociopaths" is bad and might even point to some of the questionable

Some good points here in criticizing utilitarianism. But the dividing into "geeks, noobs and sociopaths" is bad and might even point to some of the questionable ideas in so-called virtue ethics. Obviously, if someone says "I only want what's best for everyone", you shouldn't necessarily trust them. Especially if most of the people in their "everyone" live in some far off future. But what's less obvious, but more important, is that you shouldn't even trust yourself when you say such things. Corruption isn't a property that comes with sociopaths moving in and gentrifying the place. Corruption starts at home. We do NOT always want what's best for everyone, if we're honest with ourselves. We want all sorts of things, be it penthouses in Bahamas or polycules, that probably aren't for the best of everyone involved (let alone everyone). And you can't "correct" for it by, say, assigning a probability of self-deception, or creating some sort of market to estimate it (which is the sort of things EAs tend to reach for when met with fundamental criticism). You are only opening up more avenues for rationalization with such things. Your cleverness is not fully on your side in the fight to be honest with yourself.