2 ms·

no? its just weird to write an obviously snarky sentence and then follow up with "im not being snarky". you have no problem owning the tone of the blog post, w

no? its just weird to write an obviously snarky sentence and then follow up with "im not being snarky". you have no problem owning the tone of the blog post, why not own the tone of your comment?

tptacek 3mo ago
I can't judge how snarky I'm being overall. I'm writing like I would on any HN thread. What I was saying was: my lack of concern about AGI is not snark. It's weird to me that anybody would call that out. Are you super worried about AGI?
- john_strinlai 3mo ago
  >I can't judge how snarky I'm being overall okay, well, then this is me telling you that overall, the comment with the fake apology came across as really snarky. >Are you super worried about AGI? no. i typically agree with your takes on ai. i usually just happily ignore your tone and enjoy the substance of your comments but i thought this particular exchange from you was exceptionally odd so i commented on it.
  - tptacek 3mo ago
    I am paying attention to what you're saying but I think if you look at the context of this thread and take a beat you might sense, like I do, that the bar for charity is a bump or two lower than it normally is.
    - deleted 3mo ago
      [deleted]
    - dijksterhuis 3mo ago
      > this was amazing post. i enjoyed reading it, it was relevant to some work stuff i was battling with. the linked articles at the end were amazing too. i had tonnes of respect for fly.io and yourself because of these posts. technically informative, clear, engaging. great stuff. i deliberately pointed out past praise and respect i had for your writing. i made an effort to go out of my way to provide an example of good stuff. as someone said in the andrew kelley black pill youtube comments -- people are a package. i too can be abrasive, dismissive, arrogant etc. i am a flawed human being too. so, in the spirit of not being a complete fucking dick i decided to point out something good you have written. i'm highly critical of the article in question. i have the freedom and right to be critical of it, whether or not you think it's one of your best pieces of writing. and your general tone in this thread (and previous threads) has only solidified my view.
      - tptacek 3mo ago
        You gotta understand the context we're discussing this in, where a post from a year ago that raised a mob of anti-AI people got brought into a discussion about this, a post that is by itself a tricky needle to thread. That was an unpleasant and unproductive thing to do, but more important a cringe thing to do: there are apparently people still in their feelings about that post despite everything that happened in the year since to moot the debate. You're of course free to have your own opinion! I'm just relating mine.
- pseudalopex 3mo ago
  dijksterhuis said their point was your tone. Not your AGI opinion.

no? its just weird to write an obviously snarky sentence and then follow up with "im not being snarky". you have no problem owning the tone of the blog post, why not own the tone of your comment?

tptacek 3mo ago

I can't judge how snarky I'm being overall. I'm writing like I would on any HN thread. What I was saying was: my lack of concern about AGI is not snark. It's weird to me that anybody would call that out. Are you super worried about AGI?

john_strinlai 3mo ago
>I can't judge how snarky I'm being overall okay, well, then this is me telling you that overall, the comment with the fake apology came across as really snarky. >Are you super worried about AGI? no. i typically agree with your takes on ai. i usually just happily ignore your tone and enjoy the substance of your comments but i thought this particular exchange from you was exceptionally odd so i commented on it.
- tptacek 3mo ago
  I am paying attention to what you're saying but I think if you look at the context of this thread and take a beat you might sense, like I do, that the bar for charity is a bump or two lower than it normally is.
  - deleted 3mo ago
    [deleted]
  - dijksterhuis 3mo ago
    > this was amazing post. i enjoyed reading it, it was relevant to some work stuff i was battling with. the linked articles at the end were amazing too. i had tonnes of respect for fly.io and yourself because of these posts. technically informative, clear, engaging. great stuff. i deliberately pointed out past praise and respect i had for your writing. i made an effort to go out of my way to provide an example of good stuff. as someone said in the andrew kelley black pill youtube comments -- people are a package. i too can be abrasive, dismissive, arrogant etc. i am a flawed human being too. so, in the spirit of not being a complete fucking dick i decided to point out something good you have written. i'm highly critical of the article in question. i have the freedom and right to be critical of it, whether or not you think it's one of your best pieces of writing. and your general tone in this thread (and previous threads) has only solidified my view.
    - tptacek 3mo ago
      You gotta understand the context we're discussing this in, where a post from a year ago that raised a mob of anti-AI people got brought into a discussion about this, a post that is by itself a tricky needle to thread. That was an unpleasant and unproductive thing to do, but more important a cringe thing to do: there are apparently people still in their feelings about that post despite everything that happened in the year since to moot the debate. You're of course free to have your own opinion! I'm just relating mine.
pseudalopex 3mo ago
dijksterhuis said their point was your tone. Not your AGI opinion.