this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2026
9 points (100.0% liked)

TechTakes

2601 readers
104 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Want to wade into the rainbow-ridden surf of the abyss? Have a sneer percolating in your system but not enough time/energy to make a whole post about it? Go forth and be mid.

Welcome to the Stubsack, your first port of call for learning fresh Awful you’ll near-instantly regret.

Any awful.systems sub may be subsneered in this subthread, techtakes or no.

If your sneer seems higher quality than you thought, feel free to cut’n’paste it into its own post — there’s no quota for posting and the bar really isn’t that high.

The post Xitter web has spawned so many “esoteric” right wing freaks, but there’s no appropriate sneer-space for them. I’m talking redscare-ish, reality challenged “culture critics” who write about everything but understand nothing. I’m talking about reply-guys who make the same 6 tweets about the same 3 subjects. They’re inescapable at this point, yet I don’t see them mocked (as much as they should be)

Like, there was one dude a while back who insisted that women couldn’t be surgeons because they didn’t believe in the moon or in stars? I think each and every one of these guys is uniquely fucked up and if I can’t escape them, I would love to sneer at them.

(Credit and/or blame to David Gerard for starting this.)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] lurker@awful.systems 10 points 6 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (3 children)

AGI’s ETA: Delayed (again) due to technical difficulties

came across this one when doomscrolling, pretty good article with healthy doses of skepticism. out of three commenters, one appears to be a rationalist (based off the “empirical evidence” and “instrumental convergence” they mention) who tries to argue that we don’t actually need human-like AI for paperclip maxxing, even though every single AI doom argument is about smart-as-a-human and better AIs. Just comes off as goalpost moving

[–] TrashGoblin@awful.systems 2 points 4 days ago

we don’t actually need human-like AI for paperclip maxxing

This bit is true though; capitalism is already doing a fine job of paperclip maxxing.

[–] it_wasnt_arson@awful.systems 6 points 5 days ago

The obsession with utility-maximizing Bayesian agents only gets weirder as time goes on. You couldn't really get further from the paperclip maximizer concept than an LLM, and yet they still won't shut up about unaligned goals and hidden utility functions.

[–] gerikson@awful.systems 8 points 6 days ago

The header image is gold.