SneerClub

989 readers

19 users here now

Hurling ordure at the TREACLES, especially those closely related to LessWrong.

AI-Industrial-Complex grift is fine as long as it sufficiently relates to the AI doom from the TREACLES. (Though TechTakes may be more suitable.)

This is sneer club, not debate club. Unless it's amusing debate.

[Especially don't debate the race scientists, if any sneak in - we ban and delete them as unsuitable for the server.]

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

e/acc origin manifestos (awful.systems)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

17 comments fedilink hide all child comments

For your utter delight and mine.

This is readily available: https://beff.substack.com/p/notes-on-eacc-principles-and-tenets
This appears to be the first document: https://web.archive.org/web/20220602164803/https://swarthy.substack.com/p/effective-accelerationism-eacc?s=r

The original genesis appears to have been these guys rambling on Twitter shortly before one of them posted the first essay.

cheers to @[email protected] and @blakestacey for finding these

this is a worse understanding of the Second Law of Thermodynamics than creationists.

they don't name Nick Land as their origin, but do generally credit him as the creator of accelerationism, and also their ideas on the inevitability of techno-capitalism are straight out of "The Dark Enlightenment" by Land.

so firstly, I blame El Sandifer for speaking this fucking neutron star of stupidity into existence, and secondly myself for understanding most of this orchestra of neoreactionary dog whistles.

thirdly, these fuckers all talk like Sephiroth.

I feel like I should write it up to explain the AI grifter e/acc thing, but also it's hard to explain this nonsense without a #include of Neoreaction A Basilisk and I'm not sure the centrist finance types of my readership have that much patience, nor that I do.

EDIT: urgh. Vitalik Buterin is philosophising again. d/acc. https://vitalik.eth.limo/general/2023/11/27/techno_optimism.html "Special thanks to" several rationalists

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This whole, debate, is really just the question of closed systems vs open ones. That's it. If you want a dystopia because you see yourself as the winner of the final optimization, or you demand that outcome of the universe be knowable to you specifically, you will focus on closed system thermodynamics. If you enjoy the creative beauty of nature and have the capacity to change your perspective on response to the unforseen, you embrace open systems thermodynamics.

So yeah as with abuses of Bayesian logic, your desired outcome always reflects back on which assumptions you take. These takes tell you more about the person spouting then than any meaningful observations of life.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

E/acc comes across to me as run-of-the-mill libertarianism dressed in sci-fi clothes, and the idea that it's in any way related to thermodynamics is bait.