this post was submitted on 09 Dec 2024
30 points (100.0% liked)

TechTakes

1490 readers
33 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Need to let loose a primal scream without collecting footnotes first? Have a sneer percolating in your system but not enough time/energy to make a whole post about it? Go forth and be mid: 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.

(Semi-obligatory thanks to @dgerard for starting this.)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (9 children)

found a new movie plot threat https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.ads9158

funded by open philanthropy, but not only and also got some other biologists onboard. 10 out of 39 authors had open philanthropy funding in the last 5 years so they're likely EAs. highly speculative as of now and not anywhere close to being made, as in we'll be dead from global warming before this gets anywhere close from my understanding. also starting materials would be hideously expensive because all of this has to be synthetic and enantiopure, and every technique has to be remade from scratch in unnatural enantiomer form. it even has LW thread by now hxxps://www.lesswrong.com/posts/87pTGnHAvqk3FC7Zk/the-dangers-of-mirrored-life

it hit news https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/12/science/a-second-tree-of-life-could-wreak-havoc-scientists-warn.html https://www.theguardian.com/science/2024/dec/12/unprecedented-risk-to-life-on-earth-scientists-call-for-halt-on-mirror-life-microbe-research

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

I read the headline yesterday and thought, "This is 100% fundraising bullshit."

This strikes me as being exact same class of thing OpenAI does when they pronounce that their product will murder us all.

What do we call this? Marketerrorism?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago (4 children)

i see how it's critihype but i don't understand where's money in this one

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

CRITIHYPE, thank you! I couldn't find the word!

If I had to guess a motive, it would be to bring mirror biology out of the obscurity of pure research (who funds that anymore?) and to instead plant it firmly into the popular zeitgeist as a "scary thing" that needs to be defended against. This can lead to it becoming a trendy topic, and therefore fundable by grant-awarding agencies.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

as in, funding for writing ratty screeds? because they specifically want to cut funding to d-proteins and such. this also works for fundraising

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Maybe I'm being too cynical. It wouldn't be the first time this week that someone drew a spooky picture, would it?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)