4 ms·

Not opining on this one way or another, but the post buries the lede a bit with a one liner that explains where it's coming from, saying that this is all: > re

• amanaplanacanal 16d ago
  So how they enjoy their sex lives is dependant on continuing to preach AI catastrophism? I don't buy it. Lots of poly folks out here that probably don't care much about AI one way or another.
  • Sander_Marechal 16d ago
    Yeah it is. If they stop preaching AI doomerism then they're out of the cult and won't get invited to orgies anymore.
    • thevinter 16d ago
      Are you implying that every rationalist that preaches AI doomerism gets invited to orgies?
      • watwut 16d ago
        No, he is saying that if they stop preaching it, they stop being invited. A -> B does not imply B -> A.
        • Viliam1234 16d ago
          So even those who were never invited are afraid that they won't get invited anymore?
      • tsimionescu 16d ago
        No, just the ones that are part of this specific community described in the blog post.
        • Kinrany 16d ago
          "Mostly" in the title implies otherwise.
          • tsimionescu 16d ago
            The title is senstaionalist. The actual content of the article refers to a specific community, including Eliezer Yudkowsky, Aella, and others.
      • MelonArmiger 16d ago
        Isn't one of them going around offering people "reverse gangbangs" to resign from Anthropic?
    • jaycroft 16d ago
      Hate to break it to you, but I don't think the AI doomers have a monopoly on orgies. You name the political / belief system and I'll find an orgy for you by 10pm.
      • astrange 16d ago
        Neoliberal YIMBYism?
        • deleted 16d ago
          [deleted]
        • sapphicsnail 15d ago
          Don't think it was a full on orgy but I've seen some cringey Yimby parties
  • tsimionescu 16d ago
    No one is claiming that all poly people have some ties to the AI community. They make a claim about a specific community in San Francisco, that is tied together by a mix of AI doomerism and sexual relations. And it's not at all surprising or some farfetched claim that people who enjoy having sex with someone might adopt their ideas, at least publicly, for fear of losing that sexual connection.
    • deinonychus 16d ago
      >And it's not at all surprising or some farfetched claim that people who enjoy having sex with someone might adopt their ideas, at least publicly, for fear of losing that sexual connection. am i naive? in the direction you pose this, i can't imagine it's that common and if that happens i don't feel sorry for our imagined victim. being a bay area guy who attends so many orgies that AI doomerism rubs off on him? and he keeps spreading it to other people and that some substantial bulk of doomerism is due to this mechanism such that it voids the ideological purity of doomerism? i'm not a bay area guy and i haven't attended these orgies but i hope they have other shit to talk about at the orgies than AI if the relationship is flipped - being genuinely interested in the theory but then being roped into weird sex shit that you didn't ask for, sure that that sounds predatory. a sex cult where AI is instrumental, rather than an AI cult where sex is instrumental. it would be more remarkable imo but i don't know if anyone is saying out loud that's what's happening.
      • tsimionescu 14d ago
        The claim is not that there is some victim here. The claim is that these people, in spite of their claims of simply rationally following the evidence wherever it leads, have become trapped in the idea that AI doom is imminent and the only serious concern that anyone in the AI community (at least!) should have. This irrational attachment is then re-enforced not through rational discourse, but through the strong emotional bonds and biases induced by a network of sexual relations. And it also claim that this phenomenon is happening in a specific group in Berkley, California, and that a large majority of people working in AI safety at the biggest labs are members of this group.
• vintermann 16d ago
  Heh, if you think this post buries the lede, have you ever read anything by the community in question? They seem incapable of saying anything without five part Roman-numbered novel length blog posts. I think this article kind of misses a crucial point. They weren't always AI doomers, that's a thing they picked up along the way. Their core beliefs are 1. That they are the smartest, and 2. That this makes them morally superior because consequentialism (This sort of follows. If you believe in consequentialism, leaving all your decisions to the superior consequence predictor is surely the moral thing to do) Maybe one day they will stop believing in AI doom, but they will never, ever stop believing they belong to the intellectually and thus morally elect. The day any of them do that they have either broken with the cult or died.
  • bombcar 16d ago
    > They seem incapable of saying anything without five part Roman-numbered novel length blog posts. Maybe that’s why they’re so pissed, ChatGPT’s useless verbosity is threatening to put them out of a job.
    • vintermann 16d ago
      I'm tempted to say "You're absolutely right" :) yeah, it's no coincidence that AIs sound a bit like them -- a lot of the people doing the instruction tuning are affiliated with these people. And it's also a profound self-identity threat to them if that kind of intelligence is nothing special.