The problems of "meritocracy"

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I want to reclaim the term redpill. For me, it is not listening to someone on YouTube or a podcast and having them tell you how the world really is. It's you discovering how the world really is for yourself. What a lot of those personalities do is something quite different. They actually obscure the truth from you, by throwing bullshit like "evo psych" at you. Plenty of people think they're reaching for the red when they are gobbling down blue.

I'd also like to reclaim the color red. The idea of a "red state" is a historical accident due to news stations showing the same arbitrarily-colored maps over and over while everyone was trying to figure out who actually won in 2000. This dragged on so long it became burned in to everybody's brain.

Red is a much better color than blue. Blue is the boring color I wear when I want to look respectable. (I like green better than red, though.)

(My apologies for the later half of this post. Color symbolism is an interest of mine.)

 

[ygolo]

@The Cat The order of awareness for me was e/acc before Accelerationism more broadly. It was the OpenAI drama that made me aware of e/acc initially. I am barely on social media, with this site being visited more often that Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, or TikTok. The things that Garry Tan was saying on Twitter about e/acc has been my main source on the subject, and that is usually in the context of AI and whether AI should remain open and transparent or closed and opaque.

I am of the opinion, since the people arguing for closed and opaque AI development are usually in the Sci-Fi mindset, we should aim to avoid creating Cyberdyne Systems to avoid the creation of SkyNet. That's the main thing I agree with Effective Accelerationists about.

The movement seems really ill defined. I'm not sure all e/acc people are aware of all the baggage that Acceleration as a movement comes with.

I know there is another way that people who I talk to use the word. That is in the sense of Moore's Law and other such scaling laws be extended to meet everyone's human needs. I think it's an unfortunate convergence for the use of the same word for very different ideals. There are also enough dressed up allusions to physics and rationality that it'll pull people away from Effective Altruism.

Needless to say, I am against any "let the world burn" tropes (the way people in the videos use "acceleration"). I am pro-progress. I am in favor of finding things out so that more people can prosper (the way people I talk to use the word "acceleration")

 

[ygolo]

Guy is also a eugenicist and sex selective IVF user. His first wife also has some interesting things to say and I think those years say far more about him than the present. The article below is 10 years old.

"I Was a Starter Wife": Inside America's Messiest Divorce

In the middle of her headline-grabbing divorce settlement from Elon Musk, Justine Musk reveals the truth about her marriage.

www.marieclaire.com

I want the leashes put on US business' by the US government to be short and tight. Especially the ones in business with the US govt (SpaceX, Starlink...) Don't care who got red pilled and frankly I'm tired of hearing only certain people getting away with crying how the lockdowns derailed <insert thing>. Lots of people got derailed and lots got dead and anyone not white collar in certain industries are simply told to fuck off.

One thing I have learned for certain, people don't really flip political alliances, unless they are already politicians. A "moderate centrist" that goes further right, for example, was already right. Someone like me who moves much further left was already left to begin with. Someone that claims to be fiscally conservative, is just conservative. I would think people may have learned a lot from watching the last 8 years or so. Apparently not. Get ready for all your rights, self-evident or otherwise, to be chiseled away. Especially if you aren't white, male and preferably Christian (although far right wing Zionists can apply until they go back to hating the Jews again, as all fascists do.)

I am prone to be too trusting of people's motivations. I'm also prone to choosing role models who seem to embody some ideal. I am also somewhat forgiving of strange behavior from people struggling with mental illness. I am willing to accept that Elon Musk has always been a problematic figure. There are there are things that I didn't know about him.

Let's say I was Elon, is there any way I could redeem myself?

Does being problematic exclude you from ever trying to do good?

Swing voters are real. I don't think so much political effort would be spent if they were just an illusion.

The people who are flipping their votes or don't want to vote anymore used to vote Democrat. They are now going to vote Republican or not vote at all. That is a material difference in the next election even if we think they've always been that way.

In 2016, a lot of disaffected white people stayed at home or voted for Trump. These people are likely to do it again. In addition, a lot of poorer people of color are also falling into the same group. My feeling is that it's cost of living in places like NY, LA, SF and economic powerhouses in the USA. The voters who flip are not the people who live in these places currently, but who desire to move into these economic centers but cannot.

I have been warning people about that issue for a while (emailing party people directly). The collective response seems to still side with older NIMBYs because "young people don't vote". Now we see Biden losing young people, yes partly because of faltering health, but I think when young swing voters say "out of touch" , many mean exactly the cost-of-housing crisis in major economic centers.

There's a third strain of swing voters emerging among people I talk to, and yes they are 0th and 1st generation immigrants (mostly Asian, but plenty of Latinx) in some engineering or science field.

Clarence Thomas used to be a Black Panther. Donald Trump and Jared Kushner used to be registered Democrats. They were always misogynists, whatever their party affiliations. But now, in their roles, and their current party/ideology they are removing rights from women. That's an important difference between when they were officially on the left, vs being officially on the right.

Weirdly, the "acceleration" as interpreted in the videos @The Cat linked may be relevant in this context. The path from violent Marxist revolutionary to becoming a right wing Anorchist-Libertarian seems to be exactly believing in "acceleration" in the "let the world burn" way.

I like to think people can change their hearts and minds.

How would we suggest people do that in a way that doesn't send the world into the abyss?

 

[ygolo]

I want to reclaim the term redpill. For me, it is not listening to someone on YouTube or a podcast and having them tell you how the world really is. It's you discovering how the world really is for yourself. What a lot of those personalities do is something quite different. They actually obscure the truth from you, by throwing bullshit like "evo psych" at you. Plenty of people think they're reaching for the red when they are gobbling down blue.

I'd also like to reclaim the color red. The idea of a "red state" is a historical accident due to news stations showing the same arbitrarily-colored maps over and over while everyone was trying to figure out who actually won in 2000. This dragged on so long it became burned in to everybody's brain.

Red is a much better color than blue. Blue is the boring color I wear when I want to look respectable. (I like green better than red, though.)

(My apologies for the later half of this post. Color symbolism is an interest of mine.)

Indeed. Maybe we should thank people saying we should take the red pill for supporting Trans rights and see how they react.

The Wachowskis - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Lana Wachowski (born June 21, 1965; formerly known as Larry Wachowski)[1] and Lilly Wachowski (born December 29, 1967; formerly known as Andy Wachowski)[2] are American film and television directors, writers and producers.[3] The sisters are both trans women.

 

[ceecee]

I am prone to be too trusting of people's motivations. I'm also prone to choosing role models who seem to embody some ideal. I am also somewhat forgiving of strange behavior from people struggling with mental illness. I am willing to accept that Elon Musk has always been a problematic figure. There are there are things that I didn't know about him.

Let's say I was Elon, is there any way I could redeem myself?

Does being problematic exclude you from ever trying to do good?

Swing voters are real. I don't think so much political effort would be spent if they were just an illusion.

The people who are flipping their votes or don't want to vote anymore used to vote Democrat. They are now going to vote Republican or not vote at all. That is a material difference in the next election even if we think they've always been that way.

In 2016, a lot of disaffected white people stayed at home or voted for Trump. These people are likely to do it again. In addition, a lot of poorer people of color are also falling into the same group. My feeling is that it's cost of living in places like NY, LA, SF and economic powerhouses in the USA. The voters who flip are not the people who live in these places currently, but who desire to move into these economic centers but cannot.

I have been warning people about that issue for a while (emailing party people directly). The collective response seems to still side with older NIMBYs because "young people don't vote". Now we see Biden losing young people, yes partly because of faltering health, but I think when young swing voters say "out of touch" , many mean exactly the cost-of-housing crisis in major economic centers.

There's a third strain of swing voters emerging among people I talk to, and yes they are 0th and 1st generation immigrants (mostly Asian, but plenty of Latinx) in some engineering or science field.

Clarence Thomas used to be a Black Panther. Donald Trump and Jared Kushner used to be registered Democrats. They were always misogynists, whatever their party affiliations. But now, in their roles, and their current party/ideology they are removing rights from women. That's an important difference between when they were officially on the left, vs being officially on the right.

Weirdly, the "acceleration" as interpreted in the videos @The Cat linked may be relevant in this context. The path from violent Marxist revolutionary to becoming a right wing Anorchist-Libertarian seems to be exactly believing in "acceleration" in the "let the world burn" way.

I like to think people can change their hearts and minds.

How would we suggest people do that in a way that doesn't send the world into the abyss?

The most militant (left) activists often write as though the ultimate end of socialism is revolution rather than human flourishing. This is a real mistake, since the best way to win support for the left is to actually make everyone's lives better. I think starting with making everyone's life better, even small better at first, might be the best path. I realize this is an extremely big ask politically and while I think some people are capable of changing hearts and minds but I think many are still scarred from Obama and his change that wasn't a change in any sense so, it's a big ask.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I think many are still scarred from Obama and his change that wasn't a change in any sense so, it's a big ask.

Do many people feel burned by him? It seems to me like many people still have a great deal of affection for him. I don't know how you work past this. If he comes out with a statement or gives somebody a phone call, I don't know what you do. It seems like many people listen to everything he says which wouldn't be the case if they felt burned by him.

 

[ygolo]

Do many people feel burned by him? It seems to me like many people still have a great deal of affection for him. I don't know how you work past this. If he comes out with a statement or gives somebody a phone call, I don't know what you do. It seems like many people listen to everything he says which wouldn't be the case if they felt burned by him.

Barack Obama has a positive affect presence (Michelle Obama even more so, I think). He has a calm, "I got this" demeanor that appeals to people.

The issue, certainly at least somewhat driven by racism and an intransigent congress, is that his policies didn't help as much as many expected. The ACA didn't really switch the trend of healthcare costs. The government still remained extremely divided. The working class didn't really share in the economic recovery. We were still fighting forever wars. Immigration remained a mess.

I think many were hoping for their lives to get better and were disappointed.

The talk of Democracy leading to people voting themselves the largess of public treasury comes from a known enemy of Democracy itself Alexander Fraser Tytler. He believed firmly in monarchy. So every time politicians with fascist tendencies re-quotes it (attributing someone else), they reveal themselves.

Ultimately, people just want better lives. Monarchies were deposed for democracies for that purpose alone.

FDR managed to give that to people. He was flawed, and horrific thing happened on his orders. Term limits had to be created because he was so popular.

 

[ceecee]

Do many people feel burned by him? It seems to me like many people still have a great deal of affection for him. I don't know how you work past this. If he comes out with a statement or gives somebody a phone call, I don't know what you do. It seems like many people listen to everything he says which wouldn't be the case if they felt burned by him.

I don't think people really do listen to everything he says - certainly not since COVID. People on Twitter overall are mostly like - shut the fuck up - regardless of their lean, and especially POC. And I think him stopping the NBA strike pretty much singlehandedly was a red line moment for a lot of people - not basketball per se but his involvement and past ossification on labor rights overall - it shined a light on him entirely. And he could have done SO much more than he did as a president. So I don't care about his stupid book list or who he's hanging out with. He can fuck off and I wouldn't invite him to anything.

 

[ceecee]

Barack Obama has a positive affect presence (Michelle Obama even more so, I think). He has a calm, "I got this" demeanor that appeals to people.

It's more voting for personality not policy. People need to unlearn this stupidity.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I don't think people really do listen to everything he says - certainly not since COVID. People on Twitter overall are mostly like - shut the fuck up - regardless of their lean, and especially POC.

I hope that’s true. It doesn’t seem like that to me, but that might just be a family thing.

And I think him stopping the NBA strike pretty much singlehandedly was a red line moment for a lot of people - not basketball per se but his involvement and past ossification on labor rights overall - it shined a light on him entirely

I remember this. I actually find his post-presidency actions more infuriating. Generally they involve him intervening whenever something awesome is happening to stop the thing dead in its tracks. I don’t remember him ever showing up to do something anti-Trump/anti-GOP from 2016-2020, by the way. Knowing him, he probably felt it was his duty to respect a sitting President (norms and traditions), not that Trump would have returned the favor. I wish he’d felt it was his duty to stay out of those strikes and the 2020 primaries, though.

(Those primaries are why I have no patience for the argument that we have to pick someone besides Biden. Why wasn’t that done then? I know we’re not supposed to vote for someone like Sanders, but why not any of the other people running? Everyone kept on insisting on this guy with all these weird lifeguard stories. The only thing I can think of is name recognition. Part of me thinks this desire to replace Biden is actually because Biden has been better on labor rights then expected and did things like pull out of Afghanistan. It just seems funny to me that in 2020 Biden was the perfect candidate to go up against Trump, and now all of a sudden he’s not, just as he turned out to be less terrible than everyone was expecting. Everything they’re saying about Biden now was true in 2020; it seems like bullshit to me.)

As for the matter of labor, I only remember Obama mentioning it once during his presidency. Do you remember TPP and how he kept pushing for that? When it eventually failed, he mentioned something vague about protections that I’ve never heard him mention before. He argued that TPP would happen anyway but without the necessary protections. I haven’t had the time to refresh myself in detail, but from a cursory search, it seems like a lot of congressional Democrats were saying those protections were unenforceable. I also could never figure out why he was so intent on pushing that in an election year when trade deals like that have become pretty unpopular for across the board. Nobody trusts that they won’t result in massive unemployment. It was not smart to brand the Democratic party as the party that is all for that kind of thing; Donald Trump had been campaigning against trade deals like that. 2016 was just full of so many poor decisions; it’s amazing.

And he could have done SO much more than he did as a president.

What are some things you think he had the power to do, but did not?

I’m inclined to agree with you, and yet, people say that this is not his fault, that he faced a lot of Republican obstruction, and this limited what he could do. Undoubtedly, that’s not wrong, and yet, I’ve felt it’s not wholly accurate. Looking at how he operates when he’s not constrained helps paints a different picture for me.

My impression is that he had a once in a lifetime opportunity, complete with massive approval ratings when entering office, to make a lot of fundamental changes, and he squandered the opportunity. I know he had two years at the very least. That’s not nothing. But I’m serious when I say that he had a once-in-a lifetime opportunity. I doubt I’ll see everything align that perfectly in my lifetime, and that’s the tragedy of this. It’s shocking when I think about that I never really heard him talk about labor during the “Great Recession”, during a period of time when the news reports were talking about a jobless recovery for years and that the expert analysts couldn’t figure out why the profits and benefits from productivity from all the “too big to fail” institutions weren’t trickling down to everyone else. (I'll add that I graduated from college in this environment.)

I’ll add that I did try to give him a chance, at multiple junctures, despite my skepticism. In 2015, for instance, I at least thought his centrism would create some kind of civil peace and heal the intense political divisions within our society, and maybe that would be something, even if we didn’t get actual change in a lot of areas. Status quo with peace might have been acceptable. (I think everyone knows how that turned out).

Also, I was impressed by him at the DNC in 2004 (really the only noteworthy thing about that), like many people, but in the intervening four years my politics changed and I grew even more angry and skeptical of everything.

Fight Reignites Over Fears Obama Presidential Center Will Spark Gentrification

Basically, you have a lot of Black and Brown folks that don’t want to be pushed out of their community because of the Obama Presidential Library.

The Obama Foundation did not oppose the Woodlawn protections, but resisted calls for a community benefits agreement.

This is what I was alluding to earlier. This is why I suspect you are right when you say that he could have done more. Who is tying his hands in this scenario? Who is obstructing him? In this scenario, as far as I know, he has a free hand, where he could act as an inspirational leader if he wanted to. Why isn’t he going “sure, I’ll work with you guys on community benefits”? Why is he fighting them so hard? All I’ve come across is him claiming the goals are too vague and that there aren’t enough plans. The goals didn’t seem that vague; the statement reads like someone who really wants to drag their feet on this; it doesn't read like that of a transformational leader.

 

[The Cat]

Do many people feel burned by him? It seems to me like many people still have a great deal of affection for him. I don't know how you work past this. If he comes out with a statement or gives somebody a phone call, I don't know what you do. It seems like many people listen to everything he says which wouldn't be the case if they felt burned by him.

Lots of people feel burned by him, some felt burned by him first time out for other reasons, but for most people definitely by the second term close of business. He really dropped the ball. You cant go out and run on intangibles like "Hope" and "Change" then blatantly not deliver anything but more of the same. First ____________ President regardless what adjective you fill in the blank with is a novelty that wears off in one term. If you're lucky enough to get a second term, you go balls to the walls for your voter base, Obama didn't do that. The Dark Brandon people are looking for comes with a second term. Historically its usually the second term that a president earns their legacy because they're not worried about re election.

He really dropped the ball with labor too.

 

[The Cat]

Obama if he were really a man of the people would have held open the way for Occupy Wallstreet to bear up against the elite trying to shut it down, but he didnt, he was right there throwing fuel on every fire they started trying to break the protest. He did nothing to try to keep the people together because the 99% needed to shut up and color. Not to mention Bombing Barry and the Drone Dances. As to who ties his hands, thats the joke. He ties his own hands with benefiting from things more the way they are than the way they could have been. Figureheads are never what their hype suggests they could be.

 

[ceecee]

I hope that’s true. It doesn’t seem like that to me, but that might just be a family thing.



I remember this. I actually find his post-presidency actions more infuriating. Generally they involve him intervening whenever something awesome is happening to stop the thing dead in its tracks. I don’t remember him ever showing up to do something anti-Trump/anti-GOP from 2016-2020, by the way. Knowing him, he probably felt it was his duty to respect a sitting President (norms and traditions), not that Trump would have returned the favor. I wish he’d felt it was his duty to stay out of those strikes and the 2020 primaries, though.

(Those primaries are why I have no patience for the argument that we have to pick someone besides Biden. Why wasn’t that done then? I know we’re not supposed to vote for someone like Sanders, but why not any of the other people running? Everyone kept on insisting on this guy with all these weird lifeguard stories. The only thing I can think of is name recognition. Part of me thinks this desire to replace Biden is actually because Biden has been better on labor rights then expected and did things like pull out of Afghanistan. It just seems funny to me that in 2020 Biden was the perfect candidate to go up against Trump, and now all of a sudden he’s not, just as he turned out to be less terrible than everyone was expecting. Everything they’re saying about Biden now was true in 2020; it seems like bullshit to me.)

As for the matter of labor, I only remember Obama mentioning it once during his presidency. Do you remember TPP and how he kept pushing for that? When it eventually failed, he mentioned something vague about protections that I’ve never heard him mention before. He argued that TPP would happen anyway but without the necessary protections. I haven’t had the time to refresh myself in detail, but from a cursory search, it seems like a lot of congressional Democrats were saying those protections were unenforceable. I also could never figure out why he was so intent on pushing that in an election year when trade deals like that have become pretty unpopular for across the board. Nobody trusts that they won’t result in massive unemployment. It was not smart to brand the Democratic party as the party that is all for that kind of thing; Donald Trump had been campaigning against trade deals like that. 2016 was just full of so many poor decisions; it’s amazing.



What are some things you think he had the power to do, but did not?

I’m inclined to agree with you, and yet, people say that this is not his fault, that he faced a lot of Republican obstruction, and this limited what he could do. Undoubtedly, that’s not wrong, and yet, I’ve felt it’s not wholly accurate. Looking at how he operates when he’s not constrained helps paints a different picture for me.

My impression is that he had a once in a lifetime opportunity, complete with massive approval ratings when entering office, to make a lot of fundamental changes, and he squandered the opportunity. I know he had two years at the very least. That’s not nothing. But I’m serious when I say that he had a once-in-a lifetime opportunity. I doubt I’ll see everything align that perfectly in my lifetime, and that’s the tragedy of this. It’s shocking when I think about that I never really heard him talk about labor during the “Great Recession”, during a period of time when the news reports were talking about a jobless recovery for years and that the expert analysts couldn’t figure out why the profits and benefits from productivity from all the “too big to fail” institutions weren’t trickling down to everyone else. (I'll add that I graduated from college in this environment.)

I’ll add that I did try to give him a chance, at multiple junctures, despite my skepticism. In 2015, for instance, I at least thought his centrism would create some kind of civil peace and heal the intense political divisions within our society, and maybe that would be something, even if we didn’t get actual change in a lot of areas. Status quo with peace might have been acceptable. (I think everyone knows how that turned out).

Also, I was impressed by him at the DNC in 2004 (really the only noteworthy thing about that), like many people, but in the intervening four years my politics changed and I grew even more angry and skeptical of everything.

Fight Reignites Over Fears Obama Presidential Center Will Spark Gentrification

Basically, you have a lot of Black and Brown folks that don’t want to be pushed out of their community because of the Obama Presidential Library.



This is what I was alluding to earlier. This is why I suspect you are right when you say that he could have done more. Who is tying his hands in this scenario? Who is obstructing him? In this scenario, as far as I know, he has a free hand, where he could act as an inspirational leader if he wanted to. Why isn’t he going “sure, I’ll work with you guys on community benefits”? Why is he fighting them so hard? All I’ve come across is him claiming the goals are too vague and that there aren’t enough plans. The goals didn’t seem that vague; the statement reads like someone who really wants to drag their feet on this; it doesn't read like that of a transformational leader.

The idea that black and brown people are going to have their homes and businesses paved over just like the freeways all over this country did to black and brown communities in the 1950's and 1960's, by the first black presidents' library is so incredibly American you almost have to laugh at the irony.

The very first thing Obama didn't do was to have the DOJ prosecute the Wall Street executives and then the bailouts of the Great Recession. Of course years later we see exactly what not holding them accountable has accomplished. They buy state and federal legislatures at a level no one has seen before. Lawmakers do as their corporate doners tell them and the people are always left paying for these actions.

He could have authorized and fought for a stim package that focused on job creation and retention. But Larry Summers talked him out of it and that motherfucker shouldn't be allowed in public at this point, let alone making policy. Obama wouldn't even engage members of his own party let alone Republicans and at the end, there were more Democratic state legislative seats were lost under Obama than any president in modern history and I know this is partially because he just refused to fight the political battles that would have made policy more sustainable.

One thing that doesn't get discussed enough was his lack of putting forth robust immigration reform. DACA was the only thing he accomplished and that's a joke. I know one DACA recipient that finally gave up and she and her husband and baby moved to Winnipeg, her husband got a job at a collage there. She was a fantastic organizer, DSA member and did all this without being able to vote. She is in the process of becoming a Canadian citizen and from all accounts, doesn't regret leaving this idiocy at all. ACA is always hailed as a success but without teeth to force states to expand Medicaid, the exchanges will be too expensive for many. And lets fact it, the thing was a Mitt Romney/Heritage Foundation proposal to begin with.

My biggest issue is that he gave up on New Deal/civil rights and refused to do anything to create a left social and political movement at all. What he ended up accomplishing was helping to create an authoritarian, right wing, racist, bigoted xenophobic, fashy movement. In no way do I blame him for the human garbage on the right that went insane because of a black president. I blame him for doing all he could to not change anything. For increasing the US surveillance state, for continuing wars in the Middle East, for doing even more to abandon working people and treating labor like an enemy.

 

[ygolo]

The idea that black and brown people are going to have their homes and businesses paved over just like the freeways all over this country did to black and brown communities in the 1950's and 1960's, by the first black presidents' library is so incredibly American you almost have to laugh at the irony.

The very first thing Obama didn't do was to have the DOJ prosecute the Wall Street executives and then the bailouts of the Great Recession. Of course years later we see exactly what not holding them accountable has accomplished. They buy state and federal legislatures at a level no one has seen before. Lawmakers do as their corporate doners tell them and the people are always left paying for these actions.

He could have authorized and fought for a stim package that focused on job creation and retention. But Larry Summers talked him out of it and that motherfucker shouldn't be allowed in public at this point, let alone making policy. Obama wouldn't even engage members of his own party let alone Republicans and at the end, there were more Democratic state legislative seats were lost under Obama than any president in modern history and I know this is partially because he just refused to fight the political battles that would have made policy more sustainable.

One thing that doesn't get discussed enough was his lack of putting forth robust immigration reform. DACA was the only thing he accomplished and that's a joke. I know one DACA recipient that finally gave up and she and her husband and baby moved to Winnipeg, her husband got a job at a collage there. She was a fantastic organizer, DSA member and did all this without being able to vote. She is in the process of becoming a Canadian citizen and from all accounts, doesn't regret leaving this idiocy at all. ACA is always hailed as a success but without teeth to force states to expand Medicaid, the exchanges will be too expensive for many. And lets fact it, the thing was a Mitt Romney/Heritage Foundation proposal to begin with.

My biggest issue is that he gave up on New Deal/civil rights and refused to do anything to create a left social and political movement at all. What he ended up accomplishing was helping to create an authoritarian, right wing, racist, bigoted xenophobic, fashy movement. In no way do I blame him for the human garbage on the right that went insane because of a black president. I blame him for doing all he could to not change anything. For increasing the US surveillance state, for continuing wars in the Middle East, for doing even more to abandon working people and treating labor like an enemy.

Larry Summers, every time he speaks, gives me the same creeps as when hearing Jared Kushner or Jordan Peterson speak.

They have a combination of spin, lies, and distortions backing up a specific point of view delivered in an in unrelenting cadence and a calm voice that allows them to speak in public in very long-winded speeches. Unless the interviewer wants to come off as rude, they'll just go on.

Jared Kushner on Lex Friedman was the biggest propoga coup for the right they could have gotten at the most opportune time.

Lex Friedman generally does puff interviews for anyone he has on, and I think that's why he gets interviews that a lot of others can't get.

I've only seen Jon Stewart with Larry Summers manage to do a real interview with someone who has that speaking style.

I wonder if it's practiced for public life, or if gaslighting (is that the right description?) people is something they do in daily life.

Now Larry Summers is on the board of OpenAI. Is OpenAI the real-life Cyberdyne Systems, or is it Microsoft?

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Reading up on Larry Summers. I completely forgot about him, but he's definitely got a storied fucking career.

 

[ceecee]

This piece of shit Obama State dept degenerate.

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

This piece of shit Obama State dept degenerate.

This guy is a psycho. Who says something like that?

 

[ygolo]

More on the power struggles at OpenAI

Once again, it really highlights how "merit" in this case the "use of AI to benefit humanity" can be seen as coming directly from the power structure.

Also, don't ever underestimate Sam Altman in a power struggle.

Sam Altman’s Manifest Destiny

Is the head of Y Combinator fixing the world, or trying to take over Silicon Valley?

www.newyorker.com

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

Meritocracy keeps the planes flying, the subs from sinking, industrial accidents from happening. As a country one of the biggest threats we face is the everyday maintenance of complex systems.

In the real world competence matters. It feels like as a country we are losing ours. Industrial accidents seem to keep happening at an ever increasing rate. Jackson MS can't manage to keep the water drinkable. There's been an alarming rise in the near collisions of commercial airplanes.

Everyone likes to dream of what it might be like to live in a place as well run as Japan or Singapore, but having a system like that requires utter seriousness in the class of people who make everyday life work, and those writing the laws that enable it.

South Africa used to produce enough energy to keep the lights on without blackouts then in 2007 Eskom had to start load shedding. At the top you have a leadership class more interested in corruption than governance, and a populace more interested in stealing the copper out of cables than living in a first world country.

I want the best person for the job when I'm going into surgery, or flying in a plane, or heaven forbid investing with a brokerage. I want the best people designing my cars, and computer chips. I damn sure want the best maintaining our ageing grid infrastructure and gas pipelines. Hell I want the best person making my hamburger.

I'm glad that when I was in High School I could move up to the International Baccalaureate program when honors courses were boring me because of how easy they were.

I don't want to live in a country where its seen as laudable to get rid of gifted programs in the name of "equity" (from the Atlantic The left's war on gifted kids).

I don't want to live in a country where its universities get rid of standardized testing. Though it must be said that I hope the rest of the Ivy league follows Columbia in getting rid of testing (Columbia gets rid of SAT/ACT requirements) allowing for state schools to become the true measure of rigor. Schools like my Alma Mater the University of Florida which just became the number 1 public institution in the country (UF ranked no. 1 public institution by WSJ).

I'm fucking fed up with lowering the bar.

There are costs associated with making it easier for everyone. Those costs include our quality of life.

Edit: that's why I like watching football, the most brazenly meritocratic thing there is. It's beautiful to watch the best doing what they do.

 

[ygolo]

Meritocracy keeps the planes flying, the subs from sinking, industrial accidents from happening. As a country one of the biggest threats we face is the everyday maintenance of complex systems.

In the real world competence matters. It feels like as a country we are losing ours. Industrial accidents seem to keep happening at an ever increasing rate. Jackson MS can't manage to keep the water drinkable. There's been an alarming rise in the near collisions of commercial airplanes.

Everyone likes to dream of what it might be like to live in a place as well run as Japan or Singapore, but having a system like that requires utter seriousness in the class of people who make everyday life work, and those writing the laws that enable it.

South Africa used to produce enough energy to keep the lights on without blackouts then in 2007 Eskom had to start load shedding. At the top you have a leadership class more interested in corruption than governance, and a populace more interested in stealing the copper out of cables than living in a first world country.

I want the best person for the job when I'm going into surgery, or flying in a plane, or heaven forbid investing with a brokerage. I want the best people designing my cars, and computer chips. I damn sure want the best maintaining our ageing grid infrastructure and gas pipelines. Hell I want the best person making my hamburger.

I'm glad that when I was in High School I could move up to the International Baccalaureate program when honors courses were boring me because of how easy they were.

I don't want to live in a country where its seen as laudable to get rid of gifted programs in the name of "equity" (from the Atlantic The left's war on gifted kids).

I don't want to live in a country where its universities get rid of standardized testing. Though it must be said that I hope the rest of the Ivy league follows Columbia in getting rid of testing (Columbia gets rid of SAT/ACT requirements) allowing for state schools to become the true measure of rigor. Schools like my Alma Mater the University of Florida which just became the number 1 public institution in the country (UF ranked no. 1 public institution by WSJ).

I'm fucking fed up with lowering the bar.

There are costs associated with making it easier for everyone. Those costs include our quality of life.

Edit: that's why I like watching football, the most brazenly meritocratic thing there is. It's beautiful to watch the best doing what they do.

I'm not saying competence doesn't matter, only that "merit" is always colored by who is in power.

In situations that connect with the objectively verifyable world, it'll be less likely for it to color things that much.

But when we talk about "merit" in governance, we have seen time and again it's power that gets to define "merit".