4 ms·

It’s a distinct minority. They’re convinced they’re the majority because everyone they talk to is in the same bubble, especially online. I saw the same thing wi

It’s a distinct minority. They’re convinced they’re the majority because everyone they talk to is in the same bubble, especially online. I saw the same thing with Mangione and Kirk and Pelosi.

newspaper1 7mo ago
How about the 190 school girls the US murdered in the very first attack against Iran?
- JumpCrisscross 7mo ago
  Yeah, the number of people connecting a potential war crime in a military operation to Sam Altman’s San Francisco residence with violent intent are slim.
  - newspaper1 7mo ago
    I’m not saying this was due to war crimes. I’m saying war crimes blew the Overton window for violence wide open.
    - JumpCrisscross 7mo ago
      > war crimes blew the Overton window for violence wide open I see no evidence of this. We didn’t see it after Iraq. And Luigi predates all this. These aren’t organized political movements. They’re lone actors reaching breaking points. That don’t need a theory of violence, just access to guns and a day of mental instability.
2dfs 7mo ago
I think youre misreading it entirely, doesnt surprise me given that you're a VC. Here's one of the posts on that thread: "I mean one thing is to use AI or even ChatGPT as a product, and another is being aware of how billionaires treat the rest of the people As for Sam, he also has pretty controversial views for how this whole thing will pan out and how he doesn't give a shit about the consequences it might have for the rest of us. Also more recently, the whole Pentagon contract thing" People can both use LLMs whilst having a distasteful view of the leaders of the industry.
- JumpCrisscross 7mo ago
  > whilst having a distasteful view of the leaders of the industry I have a tremendously distasteful view of a lot of Silicon Valley leadership. Doesn’t mean I want them to suffer at the hands of vigilante justice.
  - MiguelX413 7mo ago
    Why not?
    - overfeed 7mo ago
      > Why not? "An old woman is always uneasy when dry bones are mentioned in a proverb" - Chinua Achebe Things Fall Apart
      - MiguelX413 7mo ago
        Interesting idiom that I haven't heard before!
      - JumpCrisscross 7mo ago
        The elites after the French Revolution were not only mostly the same as before, they escaped with so much money and wealth that it’s actually debated if they increased their wealth share through the chaos [1]. Vigilante justice usually starts by aiming for the top (or a minority group, if conducted from the top). But it's inherently anarchic, and eventually attacks anyone vulnerable in striking distance. I have Indian and central European heritage. My dry bones are knowing the cost of violence and value of peace, and degree to which even those who initially embrace violence tended to wind up regretting the offramp they previously precluded. [1] https://www.jstor.org/stable/650023 https://www.jstor.org/stable/650023
        overfeed 7mo ago
        > The elites after the French Revolution were not only mostly the same as before, they escaped with so much money and wealth that it’s actually debated if they increased their wealth share through the chaos You sound like you're trying to convince me: I am not pro-violence, but I have cracked open a history book and the same thing happens over, and over again when the masses don't get what they deserve from an out-of-touch ruling class. I briefly braved life in a very unequal society - no one is safe there. Telling a person who hopelessly feel like they have nothing to shun crime and violence while they walk the same streets as the very rich is not as effective as you think it is. > But it's inherently anarchic, and eventually attacks anyone vulnerable in striking distance. Here's the brief, recent timeline on anti-elite radicalization: -2008 the Great recession resulted in corporates get government bail-outs, while regular people got foreclosed, no one went to prison. Even getting a McJob is difficult. - 2014/2015 K-shaped economic recovery in progress. Populist politicians decide to harness the still-angry "burn it all down" demography to turn out the vote. This is what was behind the Bernie bro to Trump-voter pipeline, "drain the swamp" and all that - 2020-2022: Covid shutdowns. Businesses get bail outs again via loan forgiveness. High inflation. Cops chill outside during active shooting in Uvalde. Layoffs begin. - 2024: Brian Thompson gets shot; elites get shocked by public support expressed for the shooter, but don't introspect on whether they are out of touch, instead, executive protection budgets go up - problem solved! Layoffs continue. - 2025: DOGE cuts, SV CxOs and VC class goes completely mask-off, cuts to "entitlements" proposed, ACA subsidies killed. The who's who of elites show up in the Epstein files: not a single charge is filed. AI promises to kill jobs and companies embrace it, layoffs continue. Swamp is still not drained, crypto scams go mainstream. - 2026: (we are here) 2 citizens killed by ICE while protesting. War with Iran. Layoffs continue, now naming AI as the cause. Inflation spiking. With all this, would you be surprised that some folk may feel the scale is thumbed against them? Elites in every generation or 2 seem to need to relearn the same lesson: keeping their end of the social contract is really fucking important, in whatever form it takes in their age: giving alms, noblesse oblige, workers rights, the New Deal, etc.
kube-system 7mo ago
What I think is different today is -- regardless of how many people organically think this way -- social media is normalizing the idea. We're all being exposed to it. It's only a minority of people who are radicalized, but it's a growing minority. Radical ideas are more accessible than ever for people to latch on to. Radical views on violence, social relations, science, politics, distrust of institutions, etc are all way more common than they were in the 90s.
- JumpCrisscross 7mo ago
  > but it's a growing minority I’d want to see this interrogated with rigor. The alternate hypothesis, and my null, is a relatively fixed fraction of folks is more connected and visible today than before.
  - solid_fuel 7mo ago
    It's been studied pretty widely. https://www.npr.org/2025/10/01/nx-s1-5558304/poll-political-violence-free-speech-vaccines-national-guard-epstein-trump https://www.npr.org/2025/10/01/nx-s1-5558304/poll-political-... > Respondents were asked if they agree with the statement, “Americans may have to resort to violence in order to get the country back on track?” Agree: - March 2024: 20% - September 2025: 30% Disagree: - March 2024: 79% - September 2025: 70%
    - frm88 7mo ago
      Off topic: please tell me how you managed that formatting in the agree/disagree section?
      - solid_fuel 7mo ago
        4 spaces before a line results in monospace formatting, for code and the like. So I just started each line with ' '
        7mo ago
pesus 7mo ago
Do you spend much time with people not in the tech world? I think you'd be surprised how many people hold similar sentiments, even if not to such an extreme, especially once you talk to people in the real world. I've heard far more support for this sort of thing in real life than I have online due to fear of repercussions. Hell, even the president regularly calls for and promotes violence, so I don't think it's that much of a minority. The US was founded on it, after all.
- JumpCrisscross 7mo ago
  > Do you spend much time with people not in the tech world? Most of it. Across the political spectrum. > even if not to such an extreme That’s precisely the point. There is a massive difference between doing or aiding and abetting such behavior, cheering it on, and giving into the impulse of “couldn’t have happened to a worse person” before self correcting. There are a few saints who reject the violence at first glance. But most people are in that self correcting phase, and the correction happens the more they learn about the specifics of the assault. > even the president regularly calls for and promotes violence To what numerical end?
  - pesus 7mo ago
    > To what numerical end? How many people live in Iran, who he just threatened to genocide? How many people hold views that Trump thinks make them his enemy, including being critical of ICE? How many immigrants are in the country? It's going to be a very large number, no matter how you slice it.
    - JumpCrisscross 7mo ago
      I mean to what numerical end do Trump’s supporters pick up arms when he calls them to violence.
      - pesus 7mo ago
        This is getting more and more specific - I was talking about him encouraging violence. But some examples: Jan 6, the attack on Paul Pelosi, every ICE agent. Personally, I've also received multiple death threats from his supporters.

It’s a distinct minority. They’re convinced they’re the majority because everyone they talk to is in the same bubble, especially online. I saw the same thing with Mangione and Kirk and Pelosi.

newspaper1 7mo ago

How about the 190 school girls the US murdered in the very first attack against Iran?

JumpCrisscross 7mo ago
Yeah, the number of people connecting a potential war crime in a military operation to Sam Altman’s San Francisco residence with violent intent are slim.
- newspaper1 7mo ago
  I’m not saying this was due to war crimes. I’m saying war crimes blew the Overton window for violence wide open.
  - JumpCrisscross 7mo ago
    > war crimes blew the Overton window for violence wide open I see no evidence of this. We didn’t see it after Iraq. And Luigi predates all this. These aren’t organized political movements. They’re lone actors reaching breaking points. That don’t need a theory of violence, just access to guns and a day of mental instability.

2dfs 7mo ago

I think youre misreading it entirely, doesnt surprise me given that you're a VC. Here's one of the posts on that thread: "I mean one thing is to use AI or even ChatGPT as a product, and another is being aware of how billionaires treat the rest of the people As for Sam, he also has pretty controversial views for how this whole thing will pan out and how he doesn't give a shit about the consequences it might have for the rest of us. Also more recently, the whole Pentagon contract thing" People can both use LLMs whilst having a distasteful view of the leaders of the industry.

JumpCrisscross 7mo ago
> whilst having a distasteful view of the leaders of the industry I have a tremendously distasteful view of a lot of Silicon Valley leadership. Doesn’t mean I want them to suffer at the hands of vigilante justice.
- MiguelX413 7mo ago
  Why not?
  - overfeed 7mo ago
    > Why not? "An old woman is always uneasy when dry bones are mentioned in a proverb" - Chinua Achebe Things Fall Apart
    - MiguelX413 7mo ago
      Interesting idiom that I haven't heard before!
    - JumpCrisscross 7mo ago
      The elites after the French Revolution were not only mostly the same as before, they escaped with so much money and wealth that it’s actually debated if they increased their wealth share through the chaos [1]. Vigilante justice usually starts by aiming for the top (or a minority group, if conducted from the top). But it's inherently anarchic, and eventually attacks anyone vulnerable in striking distance. I have Indian and central European heritage. My dry bones are knowing the cost of violence and value of peace, and degree to which even those who initially embrace violence tended to wind up regretting the offramp they previously precluded. [1] https://www.jstor.org/stable/650023 https://www.jstor.org/stable/650023
      - overfeed 7mo ago
        > The elites after the French Revolution were not only mostly the same as before, they escaped with so much money and wealth that it’s actually debated if they increased their wealth share through the chaos You sound like you're trying to convince me: I am not pro-violence, but I have cracked open a history book and the same thing happens over, and over again when the masses don't get what they deserve from an out-of-touch ruling class. I briefly braved life in a very unequal society - no one is safe there. Telling a person who hopelessly feel like they have nothing to shun crime and violence while they walk the same streets as the very rich is not as effective as you think it is. > But it's inherently anarchic, and eventually attacks anyone vulnerable in striking distance. Here's the brief, recent timeline on anti-elite radicalization: -2008 the Great recession resulted in corporates get government bail-outs, while regular people got foreclosed, no one went to prison. Even getting a McJob is difficult. - 2014/2015 K-shaped economic recovery in progress. Populist politicians decide to harness the still-angry "burn it all down" demography to turn out the vote. This is what was behind the Bernie bro to Trump-voter pipeline, "drain the swamp" and all that - 2020-2022: Covid shutdowns. Businesses get bail outs again via loan forgiveness. High inflation. Cops chill outside during active shooting in Uvalde. Layoffs begin. - 2024: Brian Thompson gets shot; elites get shocked by public support expressed for the shooter, but don't introspect on whether they are out of touch, instead, executive protection budgets go up - problem solved! Layoffs continue. - 2025: DOGE cuts, SV CxOs and VC class goes completely mask-off, cuts to "entitlements" proposed, ACA subsidies killed. The who's who of elites show up in the Epstein files: not a single charge is filed. AI promises to kill jobs and companies embrace it, layoffs continue. Swamp is still not drained, crypto scams go mainstream. - 2026: (we are here) 2 citizens killed by ICE while protesting. War with Iran. Layoffs continue, now naming AI as the cause. Inflation spiking. With all this, would you be surprised that some folk may feel the scale is thumbed against them? Elites in every generation or 2 seem to need to relearn the same lesson: keeping their end of the social contract is really fucking important, in whatever form it takes in their age: giving alms, noblesse oblige, workers rights, the New Deal, etc.

kube-system 7mo ago

What I think is different today is -- regardless of how many people organically think this way -- social media is normalizing the idea. We're all being exposed to it. It's only a minority of people who are radicalized, but it's a growing minority. Radical ideas are more accessible than ever for people to latch on to. Radical views on violence, social relations, science, politics, distrust of institutions, etc are all way more common than they were in the 90s.

JumpCrisscross 7mo ago
> but it's a growing minority I’d want to see this interrogated with rigor. The alternate hypothesis, and my null, is a relatively fixed fraction of folks is more connected and visible today than before.
- solid_fuel 7mo ago
  It's been studied pretty widely. https://www.npr.org/2025/10/01/nx-s1-5558304/poll-political-violence-free-speech-vaccines-national-guard-epstein-trump https://www.npr.org/2025/10/01/nx-s1-5558304/poll-political-... > Respondents were asked if they agree with the statement, “Americans may have to resort to violence in order to get the country back on track?” Agree: - March 2024: 20% - September 2025: 30% Disagree: - March 2024: 79% - September 2025: 70%
  - frm88 7mo ago
    Off topic: please tell me how you managed that formatting in the agree/disagree section?
    - solid_fuel 7mo ago
      4 spaces before a line results in monospace formatting, for code and the like. So I just started each line with ' '
      - 7mo ago

pesus 7mo ago

Do you spend much time with people not in the tech world? I think you'd be surprised how many people hold similar sentiments, even if not to such an extreme, especially once you talk to people in the real world. I've heard far more support for this sort of thing in real life than I have online due to fear of repercussions. Hell, even the president regularly calls for and promotes violence, so I don't think it's that much of a minority. The US was founded on it, after all.

JumpCrisscross 7mo ago
> Do you spend much time with people not in the tech world? Most of it. Across the political spectrum. > even if not to such an extreme That’s precisely the point. There is a massive difference between doing or aiding and abetting such behavior, cheering it on, and giving into the impulse of “couldn’t have happened to a worse person” before self correcting. There are a few saints who reject the violence at first glance. But most people are in that self correcting phase, and the correction happens the more they learn about the specifics of the assault. > even the president regularly calls for and promotes violence To what numerical end?
- pesus 7mo ago
  > To what numerical end? How many people live in Iran, who he just threatened to genocide? How many people hold views that Trump thinks make them his enemy, including being critical of ICE? How many immigrants are in the country? It's going to be a very large number, no matter how you slice it.
  - JumpCrisscross 7mo ago
    I mean to what numerical end do Trump’s supporters pick up arms when he calls them to violence.
    - pesus 7mo ago
      This is getting more and more specific - I was talking about him encouraging violence. But some examples: Jan 6, the attack on Paul Pelosi, every ICE agent. Personally, I've also received multiple death threats from his supporters.