this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2026
14 points (100.0% liked)

TechTakes

2781 readers
133 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
 

(I get the feeling we're close to this bubble's end.)

Anyways, 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 soo 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
[–] BioMan@awful.systems 4 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/7xJeaAKTKxbHL6F9a/a-new-kind-of-prediction-market-for-science

Got a problem of randos shitting AI-generated ARXIV preprints into existence faster than the scientific community can deal with it? SHOEHORN IN PREDICTION MARKETS!

(Incidentally, my boss has been complaining about the onslaught of low quality preprints that are shat out with the usual low-quality signifiers that let you filter things being harder to immediately see, and his conclusion is that he is sad to say science is going back towards and has to go back towards systems of reputation and patronage where you have to look at who lent their reputation to a work and who newcomers are being vouched for by to determine if it is worth looking at it at all.)

(And I am again reminded of our electronic information sphere becoming like the Earth's genetic information sphere in that it is full of selfish parasites looking to hijack you to use their nonproductive information, with productive cellular life jealously guarding its genomic nucleic acids and not letting it interact with the froth of selfish viral and mobile elements bouncing off it at all times.)