The New Right-Wing Tech Intelligentsia

Post by lentil_soup » Fri, Dec 19, 2025, 8:26 PM UTC

igor47 wrote: post #17

lentil_soup wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's some mention as to why in the article, I don't think it's about being effective but about it becoming a tag and movement and the people associated with it "EA ... was originally concerned with how to get rich philanthropists to donate to the most “effective” charities but is now just as well known for its booster-doomerism about artificial general intelligence and for having had the convicted crypto fraudster…

It's only known for doomerism and SBF because reporters like the FA author chose to focus on this, and not on, say, the hundreds of thousands of lives saved around the world by EA donors and their recipient organizations. I gotta say, I'm also pretty annoyed at the guilt-by-association with the SBF thing. If word got out that SBF liked puppies, would his enemies forswear dogs? It seems pretty easy to disavow fraud an…

Post by igor47 » Fri, Dec 19, 2025, 8:33 PM UTC

lentil_soup wrote: post #22

igor47 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's only known for doomerism and SBF because reporters like the FA author chose to focus on this, and not on, say, the hundreds of thousands of lives saved around the world by EA donors and their recipient organizations. I gotta say, I'm also pretty annoyed at the guilt-by-association with the SBF thing. If word got out that SBF liked puppies, would his enemies forswear dogs? It seems pretty easy to disavow fraud an…

That's the risk of it becoming a tag and movement associated with a particular group of people. Millions of people donate to charity in different ways, effectively or not and they're not part of a movement. When it becomes uppercase Effective Altruism with very prominent yet very similar in profile advocates (tech millionaires) it becomes something different and will attract scrutiny. People can and will continue to…

Post by estearum » Fri, Dec 19, 2025, 8:40 PM UTC

lentil_soup wrote: post #22

igor47 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's only known for doomerism and SBF because reporters like the FA author chose to focus on this, and not on, say, the hundreds of thousands of lives saved around the world by EA donors and their recipient organizations. I gotta say, I'm also pretty annoyed at the guilt-by-association with the SBF thing. If word got out that SBF liked puppies, would his enemies forswear dogs? It seems pretty easy to disavow fraud an…

That's the risk of it becoming a tag and movement associated with a particular group of people. Millions of people donate to charity in different ways, effectively or not and they're not part of a movement. When it becomes uppercase Effective Altruism with very prominent yet very similar in profile advocates (tech millionaires) it becomes something different and will attract scrutiny. People can and will continue to…

Post by estearum » Fri, Dec 19, 2025, 8:43 PM UTC

GuinansEyebrows wrote: post #14

igor47 wrote: post #10

> For the untainted, effective altruism (EA) is a very online social movement popular in tech circles, which was originally concerned with how to get rich philanthropists to donate to the most “effective” charities Man this really makes me mad. Why do people love to hate on EA so much? Why is effectiveness a bad things? Is the author really advocating giving money to random charities? Or do they prefer no giving at a…

short answer: EA is a smokescreen for regressive tax policies and privatization that allows small groups to make large decisions that affect many people without allowing their input, involvement or consent.

Post by estearum » Fri, Dec 19, 2025, 8:45 PM UTC

mikkupikku wrote: post #20

nyeah wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Genuine monarchists are pretty rare in America. That was true once. Today Yarvin is massively influential. (I'm not explaining it, just reporting it.)

I think you're massively overselling "Moldbug"'s influence. Most on the right today dismiss him for being jewish. Older right-leaning people are mostly stuck on the Facebook/Fox News reservation and don't read essays or blogs, ever, and probably aren't even literate enough to understand Yarvin let alone get talking into monarchism by him. I will grant that he has influence, but definitely not "massive". Maybe he has…