It would certainly cut down on the drive by tweeters accusing him of being a gross sexist man yes, so i think that is prob it.
But I pay no attention to him at all, as i think he is super unimaginative and boring (the basilisk being the exception, apart from that he is just a transhumanist 4channer), so could have been something from earlier.
E: and yes, looking at the profile description, also mocking transpeople, Cool-Jicama-4674 is right.
>It would certainly cut down on the drive by tweeters accusing him of being a gross sexist man yes, so i think that is prob it.
But it will cause his friends to accidentally harass him for being a woman with an opinion online. So it balances out, and might even be educational if he's open to having his prejudices changed by personal experiences (ha ha, no).
I know it is normal to say ‘who hurt you’ after somebody posts
this
The key difference is that DV surveillance programs would selectively
target the places where DV happens, whereas feminism simply destroys all
relationships, irrespective of DV.
But in his case it is probably ‘Who were you stopped from hurting’
(wasn’t he banned from some Rationalist things for having loose hands?).
E: He was, thanks Dgerard
Woah, you mean he might have a vested interest in framing feminism as bad?
Who could've thought these people wouldn't be forthright with their motives.
> a) wtf is Lindy
[The Lindy effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindy_effect) is the idea that the longer something is around, the more likely it is to stick around.
It was popularized by Nassim Taleb, but also-ran [Paul Skallas](https://twitter.com/PaulSkallas) is trying to make it his whole schtick by using it so often it loses all meaning. ["Tall ceilings are Lindy"](https://twitter.com/PaulSkallas/status/1324726985688567809), whatever that means.
Really it's just a way for conservatives to justify old-but-bad ideas/institutions/laws as good with no evidence other than their longevity.
I'm actually more surprised that some economist made a pareto analysis of it all.
Oh wait, I am actually not surprised, as a philosopher of economics (well, I can say I am in Europe even without a PhD! Take that, 'merica!)
even equating in-home surveillance to village elders, whose presence, I'm assuming due to my sheer ignorance of ontology and a lack of common sense, wouldn't be as ubiquitous and omnipresent so that they won't be able to overseer every bit of happening that goes on behind closed door and beneath the facade of a persona that victims and perpetrators might wear in order to avoid prosecution.
I mean I get what Roko is talkin about - there used to be a security net where powerful people kept the regulars in check - and that's all really interesting and all that, and I'm sure you can find a society where this still works in exactly this way, but if my growing up in a small town taught me anything it's that the village elders are just as likely to look past such grievances and issues as an AI is to not pick up a black person on a picture.
instructions unclear, I tried to build a domestic-violence
surveillance program but once it saw three frames of video it just deduced
general relativity instead
Our AI detects that domestic violence primarily affects white women, whereas [black people](https://youtu.be/XyXNmiTIupg) are simply never home at all.
Another weird thing, it detects lots of DV against white women but somehow none of it is serious or undeserved.
Guess there was none of that sort, what a relief!
From an actually libertarian/conservative perspective it is amazing
how little the rationalists think about individual responsibility as the
main driver of action instead of weirdly paternalistic social
engineering schemes.
This is literally an abuser saying "if what I did was so bad why wasn't I stopped by a weird and vaguely racist system of government drones??? For some reason people just keep saying to respect women and suggesting that women stay away from me instead but that hurts everyone (that I care about, namely me.)"
I love how his response to "this seems privacy-invasive" is "no no, it would be like a fire alarm, all processing is done in situ and it only calls people when it detects a problem" as if even fire alarms, which notably do not rely on complicated AI systems to decide whether to go off, don't suffer from false alarms all the time
like my dude "put this camera in your house that calls the police if a complicated and non-verifiable machine learning algorithm is triggered" is still an invasion of privacy even if there's no actual person watching the camera feed
What in the world do all the responders here (and Roko responding to them) mean by "Lindy" (e.g. "Being monitored and kept in check is Lindy")? I can't think of any usage of that that makes sense as an adjective.
A farright term that means "based", traditional. Derived from the Lindy hypothesis that traditional things will last longer into the future because they have already lasted a long time
I would assume faster response times. So the next time you raise your open hand to give your wife a high five you’ll notice multiple red lazer beams pointed at your chest through a window and the whirring of drones in the distance.
This would only happen if your home is targeted as a place where DV happens of course.
This exact thing was a plot point in a sci-fi short story written by
someone other than roko. I just can’t remember the anthology it appeared
in rn, but: really not original.
There's an Asimov story from 1958 called "All The Troubles Of The World" about a supercomputer that predicts crime. At the beginning of the story, domestic violence has just been added to its prediction repertoire. So, yes: very not original.
I have tried for a good minute, but my brain refuses to register this
as anything but satire.
Then I read he’d be sad if the end of the pandemic caused cryptos to
loose value because people sell them in order to spend money in *actual
fucking things*… And I think I had better time relating with
psychopaths.
Could there be an old-school conservative (as in JR Tolkien’s
anti-government, anti-imperialist/racist but socially conservative
ideology) criticism of rationalism?
G.K. Chesterton's [Orthodoxy](https://www3.nd.edu/~afreddos/courses/439/orthodoxy2-3.htm) is probably your best bet. I'm sure it comes with all sorts of ugly baggage, but there's this bit:
> If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment. He is not hampered by a sense of humour or by charity, or by the dumb certainties of experience. He is the more logical for losing certain sane affections. Indeed, the common phrase for insanity is in this respect a misleading one. The madman is not the man who has lost his reason. The madman is the man who has lost everything except his reason.
Are you saying that Tolkien was anti-racist? 'cause I dunno if I'd say that Tolkien wasn't racist. At best he maybe ended up "benevolently racist" in the "black people are so good at basketball and gospel music!" way. A repeated theme of *The Lord of the Rings* and *The Hobbit* is that descent is destiny; your bloodlines make you who you are and determine what you're capable of. You have some choices within those racial constraints, but you can't escape the constraints.
Plus there was the whole [dwarves are Jews](https://dc.swosu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1172&context=mythlore) thing. "Dwarves are not heroes, but calculating folk with a great idea of the value of money; some are tricky and treacherous and pretty bad lots; some are not, but are decent enough people like Thorin and Company, if you don't expect too much..."
Same reason I'm not surprised that J.K. Rowling ended up a TERF. Harry Potter is fun and all, but it's full of similar birth-is-destiny essentialism.
> A repeated theme of The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit is that descent is destiny; your bloodlines make you who you are and determine what you're capable of.
Fantasy seems to be full of this kind of thing. I don't get why it hasn't been discussed more, but then maybe that's just my perspective from someone who's not really into fantasy.
The sad thing is they got a whole lot of that from Tolkien.
Like Tolkien both created a whole lot of really good fantasy and poisoned the well for future generations of writers with his tropes and world view.
It has been discussed. Sadly no cites because while I'm into SF I'm not that interested in fantasy so I can't remember names or fora. But basically there are people who are interested in deconstructing both SF and fantasy.
I'll add one more: Burke's *Reflections on the Revolution in France* is considered a [classic conservative critique](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflections_on_the_Revolution_in_France#Arguments) of considering human societies too abstractly and deductively. It might be older school than you're looking for, though.
I tried to think of something snarky, but honestly, when someone
becomes a parody of themselves, you can’t help but marvel at the
universe and its penchant for conjuring these funhouse mirror type
people who reflect the weirdness of existence back in all its glorious
wonky-ass stupidity.
In plain English these people don’t want freedom: they want to rid of
themselves of agency in order to be completely manipulatable as much as
they focus on manipulating other people through game theory and nudges.
A world where the AIGods manipulate you from birth to be the best and
only then can you make freely decisions only in the {Best} set of
directions
The rationalists lack the one thing that might fuel a popular
authoritarian political or religious movement: something to mobilize the
masses - preach all you want about Stability and Meritocracy, but also
add how the Cosmic Will will re-invigorate America if we follow its
directives - a personality around the Invisible Director - the regulator
of a 发家 system which experience the law but wields no power - A
distinctive symbol: the vajra as stylized diamond-lightning bolt
The bad part is I truly do think we’re moving to a 24/7 surveillance
global society due to the way it would completely obliterate most forms
of criminality and in general push people to ‘be on their best behavior’
all of the time. When you’re raised in a society like that the actual
day-to-day stress of it is probably non-existent.
Surveillance in every home?! No thank you. I will live my entire life
as a hermit rather than be spied on if they require this for every
relationship.
Also at the current state of the art there would be so many errors.
We still haven’t perfected self-driving cars. One time a car mistook the
side of a truck for a horizon and caused an accident. How is AI supposed
to know the difference between domestic violence and BDSM or in the case
of identifying emotional abuse telling real emotional abuse from a joke?
Sure we may know it when we see it but that’s not good enough for AI. If
we try to convert the heuristics we use into math we are still very
likely to miss the mark leading to many false positives and false
negatives. Besides as good as people usually are at telling the
difference if they see it in person it’s not like people never make any
mistakes at telling if there is domestic violence.
Also false dichotomy. Even if this were a viable solution it wouldn’t
mean feminism is bad. Feminism is simply the point of view that men and
women (and at least the way I interpret it, by extension intersex and
nonbinary people) are equal. That’s it. That some vocal feminists have
some bad opinions that don’t actually lend to equality between the sexes
doesn’t prove that feminism is wrong.
https://twitter.com/ReadyToDial/status/1373788318144593920
“Feminism destroys marriages, the solution is to introduce the surveillance state into the bedroom in order to protect women” is one hell of a take.
[deleted]
I know it is normal to say ‘who hurt you’ after somebody posts this
But in his case it is probably ‘Who were you stopped from hurting’ (wasn’t he banned from some Rationalist things for having loose hands?). E: He was, thanks Dgerard
Unfriendly reminder that Roko is a known sexual harasser and has been banned from Effective Altruism (etc) spaces for it.
“whereas”. “simply”. rationalist confirmed!
https://twitter.com/RokoMijicUK/status/1373802613771210755
How is this not a parody account. I know it’s not, but it’s still hard to believe.
instructions unclear, I tried to build a domestic-violence surveillance program but once it saw three frames of video it just deduced general relativity instead
[removed]
To paraphrase P.C. Hodgell, relationships which can be destroyed by feminism should be.
From an actually libertarian/conservative perspective it is amazing how little the rationalists think about individual responsibility as the main driver of action instead of weirdly paternalistic social engineering schemes.
https://twitter.com/RokoMijicUK/status/1373787060360916994?s=19
[deleted]
What is Roko’s job?
So AI will solve the problem by waiting for an incident and then intervening?
I don’t want to piss off my future AI overlords, but that’s basically what local police do already.
As the person who took on the mantle of the Basilisk in response to my abusers, I continue to be deeply disgusted in the person who created it.
This exact thing was a plot point in a sci-fi short story written by someone other than roko. I just can’t remember the anthology it appeared in rn, but: really not original.
Even the rationalist Selentelechia was shocked, so that’s saying something
The “AI” would create exactly what these guys think a feminist relationship is by requiring both parties to hit a “consent” button every five minutes
I have tried for a good minute, but my brain refuses to register this as anything but satire.
Then I read he’d be sad if the end of the pandemic caused cryptos to loose value because people sell them in order to spend money in *actual fucking things*… And I think I had better time relating with psychopaths.
rocco siffredi’s basilisk: a porn parody. pitch it.
No no no no no no no no no NO no NO NO NO NO NO no no NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
Could there be an old-school conservative (as in JR Tolkien’s anti-government, anti-imperialist/racist but socially conservative ideology) criticism of rationalism?
Truly a solution only a cishet upper-middle-class white dude would come up with
AI really is their magic pill for everything
Roko is suggesting we build the basilisk.
I tried to think of something snarky, but honestly, when someone becomes a parody of themselves, you can’t help but marvel at the universe and its penchant for conjuring these funhouse mirror type people who reflect the weirdness of existence back in all its glorious wonky-ass stupidity.
My relationship is great because of feminism, what am I doing wrong
We need more political policing in the home. Good catch!
ah yes fighting lesser evil with a greater evil
inverse utilitarianism ftw
remember that the basilisk prefers that you sneer at these dorks and if you don’t sneer and call them names you’ll be tortured forever
In plain English these people don’t want freedom: they want to rid of themselves of agency in order to be completely manipulatable as much as they focus on manipulating other people through game theory and nudges. A world where the AIGods manipulate you from birth to be the best and only then can you make freely decisions only in the {Best} set of directions
The rationalists lack the one thing that might fuel a popular authoritarian political or religious movement: something to mobilize the masses - preach all you want about Stability and Meritocracy, but also add how the Cosmic Will will re-invigorate America if we follow its directives - a personality around the Invisible Director - the regulator of a 发家 system which experience the law but wields no power - A distinctive symbol: the vajra as stylized diamond-lightning bolt
Supposed to be a deep thinker about AI, blithely suggests a totally impossible idea like this one.
The bad part is I truly do think we’re moving to a 24/7 surveillance global society due to the way it would completely obliterate most forms of criminality and in general push people to ‘be on their best behavior’ all of the time. When you’re raised in a society like that the actual day-to-day stress of it is probably non-existent.
Surveillance in every home?! No thank you. I will live my entire life as a hermit rather than be spied on if they require this for every relationship.
Also at the current state of the art there would be so many errors. We still haven’t perfected self-driving cars. One time a car mistook the side of a truck for a horizon and caused an accident. How is AI supposed to know the difference between domestic violence and BDSM or in the case of identifying emotional abuse telling real emotional abuse from a joke? Sure we may know it when we see it but that’s not good enough for AI. If we try to convert the heuristics we use into math we are still very likely to miss the mark leading to many false positives and false negatives. Besides as good as people usually are at telling the difference if they see it in person it’s not like people never make any mistakes at telling if there is domestic violence.
Also false dichotomy. Even if this were a viable solution it wouldn’t mean feminism is bad. Feminism is simply the point of view that men and women (and at least the way I interpret it, by extension intersex and nonbinary people) are equal. That’s it. That some vocal feminists have some bad opinions that don’t actually lend to equality between the sexes doesn’t prove that feminism is wrong.