6 ms·

They changed. You wouldn’t believe it but those most impacted by the mental rot that social media can induce - are the ultra wealthy.

by lijok 7mo ago

croes 7mo ago
I doubt that. The only thing social media removed was scruples and shame. People were ashamed to say such dumb things and now they think they have some kind of deeper knowledge. Their thinking didn’t change.
- monknomo 7mo ago
  I think they also suddenly had to deal with a bunch of people being mean to them, and telling them they were wrong, which drove them a little mad. Sort of an oppositional defiant thing, filtered through immense wealth and power
  - secos 7mo ago
    This. I remember many a time pmarca getting so upset and just blocking everyone who disagreed with him on Twitter. It was the weirdest thing.
    - estebank 7mo ago
      Blocking people that annoy him on Twitter is the only humanizing thing about him. Deciding that someone has annoyed you enough on that platform that you don't care to ever hear from them ever again is the only thing that made that platform usable when you have any minimal audience. "I've known you for all of 10 seconds and enjoyed not a single one of them" followed by blocking is good, actually. That doesn't make you any more correct or wrong, of course.
  - estebank 7mo ago
    After one becomes wealthy, social media easily becomes the only place where anyone says no to them. When everyone who surrounds you tells you "you're absolutely right, let me get that for you", you atrophy the muscle that let's you course correct when you're making a mistake, and when someone disagrees with you it feels that much stronger. Wealth is not the only way this can happen, you see it with notoriety and power who have gotten used to " being right" (Dawkins comes to mind), and now this experience is being "democratised" by LLMs.
- enraged_camel 7mo ago
  They can finally say "retard" openly. They have been openly gloating about this! So yes, I agree: previously they felt constrained. They no longer do.
  - Animats 7mo ago
    "Retarded" is an euphemism. It was preceded by "mentally disabled", "feeble-minded", and "idiot". Renaming doesn't help. Agnews, in Santa Clara CA, was successively called The Great Asylum for The Insane, Agnews Insane Asylum, Agnews Mental Hospital, Agnews Developmental Center, and Oracle's Santa Clara campus.
_fat_santa 7mo ago
I have a tangential theory to this. Being rich != being famous. There are tons of extremely wealthy people out there that keep a very low profile. Sure they might be well known within their circle but ask the average person and they have no clue who that person is. I would say this is the case for like 90-95% of billionaires. Musk, Andreessen, Zuck and others were all in this camp 10 years ago but they all decided that simply being rich wasn't enough, they wanted to be famous. These folks have all the resources and connections to become famous so they can get on all the podcasts, write op-eds, and are guaranteed to get the best reach on social media and thus the most eyeballs on their content and the most attention paid to them. But when you go from making a few media appearances a year to constantly making media appearances in one way or another is that you need more "content" so to speak. Just like a comedian needs more content if they are going to do a 1hr special versus a 10min set at a comedy club. The problem for all these guys is they have a few genuinely insightful ideas mixed in with a ton of cooky and out of touch ideas. Before they could safely stick to the genuinely insightful ideas but as they've made more and more appearances, they have to reach for some of those other ideas. They don't realize that their cooky ideas sound very different than their few insightful ideas. They think all their ideas are insightful based on the feedback they have been getting for the past decade or so.
- aworks 7mo ago
  I need to reread it but Paul Fussell makes the case that old wealth is inconspicuous and secure (and maybe inherited) versus nouveau riche which is about visible luxury, branding, and showy consumption. I don't remember if he mentions the need to promote ideas. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class:_A_Guide_Through_the_American_Status_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class:_A_Guide_Through_the_Ame...
  - deadbishop 7mo ago
    Paul Fussel’s Class was an interesting read
  - bluecheese452 7mo ago
    Meh dynastic families which are about as old money as you can get have some of the most ostentatious displays of wealth. They sit on thrones, wear crowns, and preside over public celebrations.
j2kun 7mo ago
Elon was always problematic. His increasing social media use removed the natural filters that prevented people from seeing it.
- piker 7mo ago
  I'm not defending Musk, but "problematic" used in this type of context is one of those words that says more about the speaker than it does the subject.
  - joleyj 7mo ago
    It seems to me to be saying that the person finds Elon Musk’s behavior problematic. What else are you reading into it?
  - lokar 7mo ago
    I think you can forgive it as a rhetorical device when speaking to a really broad audience.
    - CamperBob2 7mo ago
      IMO it's best to use fewer thought-terminating cliches in that case, not more. Unless one is simply engaging in a Reddit-style call-and-response exercise. To me, Musk crossed from "maverick" to "problematic" around 2018, when he tried to insert himself into the Thai cave rescue operation and ended up slinging accusations of pedophilia on Twitter. At this point, he has unlocked many more specific adjectival achievements, and those are the ones that should be invoked whenever Musk's behavior is the topic. (Which it isn't here.)
  - rhines 7mo ago
    I feel like taking issue with a word, even when used in a perfectly valid situation, is something worth reflection. Like fair enough if you've heard problematic used in ways you disagree with before, but maybe respond to those comments, not one where you agree with its use. Unless you actually do mean to defend Musk and don't think lying to investors, calling people pedos for saving kids, delaying public infrastructure, doing Nazi salutes, etc. etc. is problematic.
consumer451 7mo ago
I often wonder if tech billionaire psychosis might lead to a "Great Filter" event for our species. They have entirely unchecked power, lack of empathy, and gleeful ignorance of everything our species has done that their success rests upon.
- Henchman21 7mo ago
  They haven't even read the scifi that positions AI as an obvious resource trap. Sure, let's devote all our resources to birthing an AI. Do we think if its smarter than us we can contain it? Do we think it will help us by default? Have we not thought through the basics of what we're attempting?

They changed. You wouldn’t believe it but those most impacted by the mental rot that social media can induce - are the ultra wealthy.

by lijok 7mo ago

They changed. You wouldn’t believe it but those most impacted by the mental rot that social media can induce - are the ultra wealthy.

croes 7mo ago

I doubt that. The only thing social media removed was scruples and shame. People were ashamed to say such dumb things and now they think they have some kind of deeper knowledge. Their thinking didn’t change.

monknomo 7mo ago
I think they also suddenly had to deal with a bunch of people being mean to them, and telling them they were wrong, which drove them a little mad. Sort of an oppositional defiant thing, filtered through immense wealth and power
- secos 7mo ago
  This. I remember many a time pmarca getting so upset and just blocking everyone who disagreed with him on Twitter. It was the weirdest thing.
  - estebank 7mo ago
    Blocking people that annoy him on Twitter is the only humanizing thing about him. Deciding that someone has annoyed you enough on that platform that you don't care to ever hear from them ever again is the only thing that made that platform usable when you have any minimal audience. "I've known you for all of 10 seconds and enjoyed not a single one of them" followed by blocking is good, actually. That doesn't make you any more correct or wrong, of course.
- estebank 7mo ago
  After one becomes wealthy, social media easily becomes the only place where anyone says no to them. When everyone who surrounds you tells you "you're absolutely right, let me get that for you", you atrophy the muscle that let's you course correct when you're making a mistake, and when someone disagrees with you it feels that much stronger. Wealth is not the only way this can happen, you see it with notoriety and power who have gotten used to " being right" (Dawkins comes to mind), and now this experience is being "democratised" by LLMs.
enraged_camel 7mo ago
They can finally say "retard" openly. They have been openly gloating about this! So yes, I agree: previously they felt constrained. They no longer do.
- Animats 7mo ago
  "Retarded" is an euphemism. It was preceded by "mentally disabled", "feeble-minded", and "idiot". Renaming doesn't help. Agnews, in Santa Clara CA, was successively called The Great Asylum for The Insane, Agnews Insane Asylum, Agnews Mental Hospital, Agnews Developmental Center, and Oracle's Santa Clara campus.

_fat_santa 7mo ago

I have a tangential theory to this. Being rich != being famous. There are tons of extremely wealthy people out there that keep a very low profile. Sure they might be well known within their circle but ask the average person and they have no clue who that person is. I would say this is the case for like 90-95% of billionaires. Musk, Andreessen, Zuck and others were all in this camp 10 years ago but they all decided that simply being rich wasn't enough, they wanted to be famous. These folks have all the resources and connections to become famous so they can get on all the podcasts, write op-eds, and are guaranteed to get the best reach on social media and thus the most eyeballs on their content and the most attention paid to them. But when you go from making a few media appearances a year to constantly making media appearances in one way or another is that you need more "content" so to speak. Just like a comedian needs more content if they are going to do a 1hr special versus a 10min set at a comedy club. The problem for all these guys is they have a few genuinely insightful ideas mixed in with a ton of cooky and out of touch ideas. Before they could safely stick to the genuinely insightful ideas but as they've made more and more appearances, they have to reach for some of those other ideas. They don't realize that their cooky ideas sound very different than their few insightful ideas. They think all their ideas are insightful based on the feedback they have been getting for the past decade or so.

aworks 7mo ago
I need to reread it but Paul Fussell makes the case that old wealth is inconspicuous and secure (and maybe inherited) versus nouveau riche which is about visible luxury, branding, and showy consumption. I don't remember if he mentions the need to promote ideas. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class:_A_Guide_Through_the_American_Status_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class:_A_Guide_Through_the_Ame...
- deadbishop 7mo ago
  Paul Fussel’s Class was an interesting read
- bluecheese452 7mo ago
  Meh dynastic families which are about as old money as you can get have some of the most ostentatious displays of wealth. They sit on thrones, wear crowns, and preside over public celebrations.

j2kun 7mo ago

Elon was always problematic. His increasing social media use removed the natural filters that prevented people from seeing it.

piker 7mo ago
I'm not defending Musk, but "problematic" used in this type of context is one of those words that says more about the speaker than it does the subject.
- joleyj 7mo ago
  It seems to me to be saying that the person finds Elon Musk’s behavior problematic. What else are you reading into it?
- lokar 7mo ago
  I think you can forgive it as a rhetorical device when speaking to a really broad audience.
  - CamperBob2 7mo ago
    IMO it's best to use fewer thought-terminating cliches in that case, not more. Unless one is simply engaging in a Reddit-style call-and-response exercise. To me, Musk crossed from "maverick" to "problematic" around 2018, when he tried to insert himself into the Thai cave rescue operation and ended up slinging accusations of pedophilia on Twitter. At this point, he has unlocked many more specific adjectival achievements, and those are the ones that should be invoked whenever Musk's behavior is the topic. (Which it isn't here.)
- rhines 7mo ago
  I feel like taking issue with a word, even when used in a perfectly valid situation, is something worth reflection. Like fair enough if you've heard problematic used in ways you disagree with before, but maybe respond to those comments, not one where you agree with its use. Unless you actually do mean to defend Musk and don't think lying to investors, calling people pedos for saving kids, delaying public infrastructure, doing Nazi salutes, etc. etc. is problematic.

consumer451 7mo ago

I often wonder if tech billionaire psychosis might lead to a "Great Filter" event for our species. They have entirely unchecked power, lack of empathy, and gleeful ignorance of everything our species has done that their success rests upon.

Henchman21 7mo ago
They haven't even read the scifi that positions AI as an obvious resource trap. Sure, let's devote all our resources to birthing an AI. Do we think if its smarter than us we can contain it? Do we think it will help us by default? Have we not thought through the basics of what we're attempting?