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

The New Right-Wing Tech Intelligentsia

bayareacurrent.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 96 posts

Re: The New Right-Wing Tech Intelligentsia

#41

Post by zozbot234 »

mikkupikku wrote: post #33
igor47 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're implying that my engagement with EA is so shallow as to stop at the name -- you're incorrect. Sorry if I'm unfairly reading this as an ad hominem, but that's how it's coming off. On the merits, I think you're also wrong. Even beyond the money channeled by the movement, I think the philosophical discourse around how best to help people, what your obligations are to other people, and how to measure effectiven…

I'm not sure if you are or aren't making a clear distinction between "Effective Altruism" and the premise of trying to be effective with your altruism. Everybody who is altruistic tries or at least hopes to be effective with their altruism, and what exactly that means depends on their personal set of values and perspective. An animal lover who donates only to no-kill shelters for love of animals is trying to be effec…

This is almost completely backwards, there are many effective altruists who are quite highly committed to animal welfare.

Re: The New Right-Wing Tech Intelligentsia

#42

Post by estearum »

mikkupikku wrote: post #38
estearum wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“He has no influence… except perhaps among a small group of the most ideologically extreme, politically active, industrially dominant, and financially resourced people on the planet” No one thinks Yarvin is popular. They think (know) he’s influential among the very specific small group that you disclaim any knowledge of.

I said monarchists are rare . I maintain that they are, even if rich people rank among their numbers. About the only people from whom you could expect an affinity for monarchism, in America, are rich people who consider themselves aristocrats already (who although powerful, are very few in number) and weird greasy kids in highschools. Incidentally, I did stumble across the existence of a group of genuine monarchists…

Eh, I've met at least one "monarchist" (blurry boundary between that and fascist, per his own words) who doesn't fit that description at all. There are people out there who just want to be dom'd by some old man in DC.

And yes, you did say they are rare. Then you said they're not influential while carving out the one major source of alleged influence.

I don't take any issue with the rarity claim, but it's at this point dangerously naive to act like Yarvin's incredibly unimpressive and juvenile ideas aren't literally shaping our daily lives as we speak.

Re: The New Right-Wing Tech Intelligentsia

#43

Post by goatlover »

zozbot234 wrote: post #34
Iridescent_ wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who deserves to receive help (and, by contrast, who is undeserving of even basic decency) should never, ever be the decision of a few ploutocrats. The state should decide on such matters, and be the upholder of equality. Else, misery becomes a contest for who can be the most compelling, most attractive miserable to the elites.

There's no such thing as "the state" except as a societal arrangement. When you argue that "the state" should decide on who gets what, what you're really saying is that this should be the decision of a few power-crazed career bureaucrats, with no accountability whatsoever or any "skin in the game". At least the plutocrat is paying for the aid out of pocket: he will care somewhat that the money is not outright misused…

There's no such thing as "society" except for societal arrangement. And societies of any decent size for the past several thousand years have arranged for governments who decide all sorts of things. Why would state aid be decided by a few "power-crazed" career bureaucrats in representative democracies? This sounds like a libertarian screed against the state doing anything but the minimal.

Re: The New Right-Wing Tech Intelligentsia

#44

Post by nis0s »

Here’s an idea. What if instead of left/right wing, you’d sort ideas into useful and useless buckets, given that the context of these labels will change depending on your use case. X is useful for Y, but useless for Z. Ideally, you are tooling around with pro-social ideas for your governance or societal organization frameworks, which is a necessity if you’re optimizing for freedom, morality or ethics.

Sadly, in lieu of understanding larger societal contexts, our roles in them, and reasoning about uncertainty using grounded frameworks or rationale, most people have a tendency towards tribalism, and this is evident for proponents of both left- and right-wing ideologies. What we’re up against is already codified as the seven deadly sins, and despite the centuries of human societal and technological progress, these basic assumptions about anti-social human behavior still hold true.

The problem is when folks lock themselves into positions which they unfortunately convince themselves are beyond reproach. I like the Hegelian approach to ethics and freedom in society, but of course anyone may convince themselves that he’s speaking from their perspective, which I think is great. It shows how similar we all are.

Re: The New Right-Wing Tech Intelligentsia

#45

Post by zozbot234 »

nis0s wrote: post #44

Here’s an idea. What if instead of left/right wing, you’d sort ideas into useful and useless buckets, given that the context of these labels will change depending on your use case. X is useful for Y, but useless for Z. Ideally, you are tooling around with pro-social ideas for your governance or societal organization frameworks, which is a necessity if you’re optimizing for freedom, morality or ethics. Sadly, in lieu…

> What if instead of left/right wing, you’d sort ideas into a useful and useless buckets

But that's just boring, petty bourgeois centrism.

Re: The New Right-Wing Tech Intelligentsia

#47

Post by estearum »

mikkupikku wrote: post #33
igor47 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're implying that my engagement with EA is so shallow as to stop at the name -- you're incorrect. Sorry if I'm unfairly reading this as an ad hominem, but that's how it's coming off. On the merits, I think you're also wrong. Even beyond the money channeled by the movement, I think the philosophical discourse around how best to help people, what your obligations are to other people, and how to measure effectiven…

I'm not sure if you are or aren't making a clear distinction between "Effective Altruism" and the premise of trying to be effective with your altruism. Everybody who is altruistic tries or at least hopes to be effective with their altruism, and what exactly that means depends on their personal set of values and perspective. An animal lover who donates only to no-kill shelters for love of animals is trying to be effec…

> A member of the "Effective Altruism" community however would likely say that person is being ineffective because kill shelters are a unfortunate necessity to make the numbers on pet adoption work out, and anyway they shouldn't be donating to animal welfare in the first place because the most effective way to be altruistic is to buy mosquito nets for poor tropic countries

It's convenient that statements like this always come out just a few sentences into a critique of EA to helpfully reveal a complete ignorance of EA.

You've evidently been exposed to a lot more contrarian handwringing about EA than to actual EA thought.

This is like someone confidently criticizing Mormons' tradition of visiting Mecca. It just makes zero sense.

Re: The New Right-Wing Tech Intelligentsia

#49

Post by goatlover »

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…

Having influence over tech billionaires running some of the most influential companies in the world seems like a lot of influence.

Re: The New Right-Wing Tech Intelligentsia

#50

Post by goatlover »

belter wrote: post #19

Silicon Valley was never liberal. It was always pro libertarian, wrapped in some kind of social progress branding. What changed is that the mask slipped... The same people, who preached openness and democracy, now pivot overnight to nationalism and strong state fantasies when regulation or taxes appear, like for example Marc Andreessen recent disgusting ideological flip-flops. Calling this an intelligentsia is too ki…

Problem is they help get people elected who enable if not outright embrace these sorts of ideas.
Post reply on HN