Non-paywalled link: https://archive.ph/9Hihf
In his latest NYT column, Ezra Klein identifies the neoreactionary philosophy at the core of Marc Andreessen’s recent excrescence on so-called “techno-optimism”. It wasn’t exactly a difficult analysis, given the way Andreessen outright lists a gaggle of neoreactionaries as the inspiration for his screed.
But when Andreessen included “existential risk” and transhumanism on his list of enemy ideas, I’m sure the rationalists and EAs were feeling at least a little bit offended. Klein, as the founder of Vox media and Vox’s EA-promoting “Future Perfect” vertical, was probably among those who felt targeted. He has certainly bought into the rationalist AI doomer bullshit, so you know where he stands.
So have at at, Marc and Ezra. Fight. And maybe take each other out.
surface probing of the RatioSphere indicates that ezra has already, by associating with NY times, become something something molech, thus limiting interaction between these these two [sic] Tribes by mechanism of -consults terminology cheat sheet- absurdity heuristic
deleted by creator
I see him more as a dupe than a Cassandra. I heard him on a podcast a couple months ago talking about how he’s been having conversations with Bay Area AI researchers who are “really scared” about what they’re creating. He also spent quite a bit of time talking up Geoffrey Hinton’s AI doomer tour. So while I don’t think Ezra’s one of the Yuddite rationalists, he’s clearly been influenced by them. Given his historical ties to effective altruism, this isn’t surprising to me.
deleted by creator
quick question: who will be left to avenge ms nina simone?
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Andreessen, who sits on Meta’s board of directors, was asked about the possible fight at the Allen & Company conference, a gathering for the wealthy and well connected in Sun Valley, Idaho.
It “begins with a happy, well-ordered state where people who know their place live in harmony and submit to tradition and their God,” Mark Lilla writes in his 2016 book, “The Shipwrecked Mind: On Political Reaction.” He continues:
What the muscled ancients knew and what today’s flabby whingers have forgotten is that man must cultivate the strength and will to master nature, and other men, for the technological frontier to give way.
He is clear on who they are, in a section titled simply “The Enemy.” The list is long, ranging from “anti-greatness” to “statism” to “corruption” to “the ivory tower” to “cartels” to “bureaucracy” to “socialism” to “abstract theories” to anyone “disconnected from the real world … playing God with everyone else’s lives” (which arguably describes the kinds of technologists Andreessen is calling forth, but I digress).
In exchange for a cleaner environment, we adopted laws effective at modifying, slowing and even stopping traditional “brown” infrastructure seen as threatening environmental quality, such as highways, oil pipelines and industrial facilities.
But the politics of sustainability — as evidenced in legislation like the Inflation Reduction Act — have settled into another place entirely: a commitment to solving our hardest environmental problems by driving technology forward, by investing and deploying clean energy infrastructure at a scale unlike anything the government has done since the 1950s.
The original article contains 2,456 words, the summary contains 255 words. Saved 90%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
