Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sam Altman's home targeted in second attack

sfstandard.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 433 posts

Re: Sam Altman's home targeted in second attack

#151

Post by kelipso »

tptacek wrote: post #148
afpx wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, it's not really that complicated. Americans (at least Pennsylvanians) born before, say 2000 were explicitly taught that violence is ok if it's against tyranny. Apparently, they stopped teaching that after 2010, so we're now in a post-natural-rights era. I went to high school in Pennsylvania.

We went to different high schools in the 1990s, because that isn't at all what I was taught.

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants” has been a popular quote in the US for a long time.

Re: Sam Altman's home targeted in second attack

#152

Post by hax0ron3 »

TurdF3rguson wrote: post #131
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that he would rather live in an underground bunker He isn’t, never has and never will. I know some of the bunker people. They basically have them in the way you or I might have a fancy tool in the garage or piece of art. It’s a discussion piece for a different class of wealth.

That's a cute theory that it's just a conversation starter. Truth is, he knows he will need that bunker when the shit hits the fan. And it's already starting to.

I don't see the bunkers as being as useful as some might imagine them to be. In the kind of apocalyptic scenario which would actually make him want to move to the bunker in New Zealand, why would his security people bother to keep taking orders from him instead of just taking his stuff and demoting him to an advisor or maybe even killing him? I guess it's better than dying outside the bunkers, but there's a good chance that he would lose his status and live subordinate to whoever the local warlord turns out to be.

Re: Sam Altman's home targeted in second attack

#153

Post by G0lg0thvn »

tptacek wrote: post #128
cucumber3732842 wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You said they were "abnormal" and "trolls" but you dressed it up in the sort of snooty language that HN expects you to dress it up in. Civil violence is the backstop of literally every societal system. While it would be better if the systems work, civil violence is what happens if they don't and tends to increase until they do.

[flagged]

[flagged]

Re: Sam Altman's home targeted in second attack

#154

Post by kelipso »

maplethorpe wrote: post #136

I feel like Altman's PR team is dropping the ball. We somehow need to get the word out that AI tools will benefit all of humanity, not detract from it.

When they’re saying that most people will be unemployable in a few years and there is no plan to fix that…in a country where you go hungry and homeless without a job, people will get a bit restless.

Re: Sam Altman's home targeted in second attack

#155

Post by existencebox »

tptacek wrote: post #148
afpx wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, it's not really that complicated. Americans (at least Pennsylvanians) born before, say 2000 were explicitly taught that violence is ok if it's against tyranny. Apparently, they stopped teaching that after 2010, so we're now in a post-natural-rights era. I went to high school in Pennsylvania.

We went to different high schools in the 1990s, because that isn't at all what I was taught.

While I typically avoid touching non-technical topics, I have the opportunity to chime in as another PA highschooler from the 90's, we absolutely were taught that, down to details in AP courses such as the impact of individuals like John Brown. While I'm not sure I'd have worded it precisely like the parent, the concept of "the four boxes of liberty" and the progression thereof was certainly understood and conveyed. (There was substantial study of the labor rights movements and conflicts/resistance therein as well)

Re: Sam Altman's home targeted in second attack

#156

Post by locao »

__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #142
samrus wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting way to put it. If it did solve problems, you would be ok with it happening?

Not gp, but if they were exceptionally large problems... Yeah.

Violence is never but sometimes the answer.

Re: Sam Altman's home targeted in second attack

#157

Post by kelipso »

ordu wrote: post #105
samrus wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get the sentiment but this is disengenuous. Political violence built this democracy

I believe it doesn't matter. You see, if you try applying this trick to different traits of a society, it would lead to conclusions like: it is impossible for us to build an environmentally conscious society because we come here by being environmentally unconscious. It is a historical determinism, and it just don't work. For example, Europe was mostly a constant war between states, but after WWII it managed to come t…

It feels like there’s a flaw in your argument somewhere. Your thesis is historical determinism doesn’t work and therefore using it as an argument for political violence is flawed. …But the fact remains that political violence does work and we expect it to work. For a current example, see the bombing of Iran to effect regime change.

Back to the argument that historical determinism is flawed…

I think it’s very reasonable to say that it happened in the past, therefore it probably will happen in the future. That’s the basis for pretty much any kind of prediction.

If you want to argue against historical determinism, you have to make the specific argument for why the current state is different enough that we can’t use the past to predict the future.

Re: Sam Altman's home targeted in second attack

#159

Post by refurb »

ropetin wrote: post #29
avaer wrote: post #7

In case someone reading this is thinking similar thoughts: there's no version of reality where doing this will solve any problem. Don't.

While I 100% do not support violence against Sam Altman, or anyone else for that matter, what are people without billions of dollars and without the ear of the president supposed to do to affect change in this modern, post-capitalist hellscape? And I am genuinely interested in ideas that people think will work, not just trying to be combative.

Organize, petition your representative and vote.

The people saying it doesn’t work are the same people who can’t must the effort to even contact their representative.

I had a professor in college who was big on entrepreneurship. So he formed an organization, got others involved, went to Washington to lobby his rep. His rep said “let’s do it”, and sat him down with her staff to write a bill. That bill was brought to the floor for a vote and passed.

Until you’ve done that, dont complain the system doesn’t work.

The issue with politics today is the level of engagement of the average voter. Few people ever get involved, so the vacuum gets filled with whichever power-hungry mediocre person who puts some effort in.

Re: Sam Altman's home targeted in second attack

#160

Post by kelipso »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #12
echelon wrote: post #5

I have a few predictions for this year: 1. Violent attacks against AI CEOs, researchers, and engineers is going to begin. This is due to widespread negative press that AI receives and as well as a pervasive feeling of economic uncertainty and doom in the population. Some of this being caused by the current administration's leadership, but much of it attributed to AI taking jobs and destroying opportunity. 2. Violent…

If violent attacks start metastasizing, it legitimately justifies a police crackdown. Most of the population will be for that. The pro-Palestinian activists set their cause back a year by overplaying their hands in Columbia at the start of the war. If we want to ensure zero AI legislation for the next 2 years, I couldn’t think of a better way to ensure that than to start potting randos in the streets.

Whether most of the population will or will not be for that is an open question.
Post reply on HN