8 ms·

This article is representative of what's wrong in internet culture. It's fine to take a moral stance, but it's not reasonable to expect others to agree with and

This article is representative of what's wrong in internet culture. It's fine to take a moral stance, but it's not reasonable to expect others to agree with and align with your personal morals. I've been vegetarian for over 30 years, on moral (environmental) grounds. It does put me in the minority. But I don't expect others to change their behavior. If you want to avoid AI, avoid AI. If you feel strongly enough that you want to avoid entire companies or corners of the internet, great. These are just the side effects of having a strong opinion.

intended 5mo ago
Bit confused - you and me voluntarily reading a blog post linked on HN, doesn't make the author someone who is pushing their morals on us? I read the article, and at worst it could be called whinging, but at its lowest point it never came across as trying to push a view point on the reader. What am I missing?
- bensyverson 5mo ago
  It’s less about the article pushing a POV (although it does), and more about the attitude of the author, which is basically “I’m angry that taking an absolutist stance will cause discomfort!”
ajam1507 5mo ago
Having a libertarian stance on morality is great unless its actually important to take a stand. It's the difference between "I would never own slaves" and being an abolitionist. I think it's pretty reasonable to expect others to agree and align with my personal morals around slavery.
- bensyverson 5mo ago
  To me, slavery is an ethical issue and transcends morals, but setting that aside: You have to follow your own moral compass and do what's workable. If you're compelled to take a stand, take a stand. Just know that you can't force other people to change their morals. People who follow this line of thought to its extreme end up killing people who disagree with them. This is how you get everything from anarchist bombings to civil wars. Personally I think car culture is more damaging than data centers and the threat of super intelligence, but I'm not willing to kill anyone over any of it.
  - ajam1507 5mo ago
    I'm not sure why you're setting slavery aside. It's my whole point. Do you think the Union should have conceded the civil war because "you can't force other people to change their morals?"

intended 5mo ago

Bit confused - you and me voluntarily reading a blog post linked on HN, doesn't make the author someone who is pushing their morals on us? I read the article, and at worst it could be called whinging, but at its lowest point it never came across as trying to push a view point on the reader. What am I missing?

bensyverson 5mo ago
It’s less about the article pushing a POV (although it does), and more about the attitude of the author, which is basically “I’m angry that taking an absolutist stance will cause discomfort!”

ajam1507 5mo ago

Having a libertarian stance on morality is great unless its actually important to take a stand. It's the difference between "I would never own slaves" and being an abolitionist. I think it's pretty reasonable to expect others to agree and align with my personal morals around slavery.

bensyverson 5mo ago
To me, slavery is an ethical issue and transcends morals, but setting that aside: You have to follow your own moral compass and do what's workable. If you're compelled to take a stand, take a stand. Just know that you can't force other people to change their morals. People who follow this line of thought to its extreme end up killing people who disagree with them. This is how you get everything from anarchist bombings to civil wars. Personally I think car culture is more damaging than data centers and the threat of super intelligence, but I'm not willing to kill anyone over any of it.
- ajam1507 5mo ago
  I'm not sure why you're setting slavery aside. It's my whole point. Do you think the Union should have conceded the civil war because "you can't force other people to change their morals?"