This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
The condemnation of EA over this is kinda funny. If SBF showed up to any other charity, or person or organization, including everyone criticizing him, and offered billions of dollars over a decade, I don't think they'd say "uh, what if this large heavily invested business secretly committing fraud though? I demand an invasive audit of your books to make sure, and I won't take the money otherwise." And that goes double for just 'advising SBF'.
SBF didn’t just show up one day at an EA event with billions of dollars. He was homegrown. He was in effective altruism before he was rich. He literally worked for The Center for Effective Altruism before leaving to start Alameda Research. Caroline Ellison ran a semi-anonymous blog jam packed with rationalist and EA references for years before she even started at Alameda or got into crypto. (Seriously, read it. This is a person who really thought they were maximizing expected utility by running an undercollateralized hedge fund into the ground. Fascinating.) These were true believers in the movement. Effective altruism was central to their identities. The fact that FTX not only failed but caused billions of dollars in collateral damage suggests that something is deeply wrong with the core philosophy.
Maybe there's something deeply wrong with the core philosophy of crypto? FTX is EA's one big scandal - but FTX was a crypto company, and while the rest of EA is not obviously fraudulent, the rest of crypto is covered in frauds! Crypto scams are prevalent, exchanges collapsing and coins rugpulling are a constant - the most popular exchange, Binance, was generally regarded as shadier than FTX and continues to operate with, iirc, unclear legal status. Most of crypto's popularity and price come from people seeing the coin go up and wanting to get rich, and making up weird sounding 'decentralization' reasons for why it's making them rich. It makes much more sense to blame crypto for FTX than EA.
To be clear, this doesn't prove crypto is bad - it's clearly significantly populated with scammers and groundless speculators, but that doesn't mean the original ideals or ethereum or w/e aren't useful anyway. And in a broader sense - again, frauds happen everywhere, much of accounting and finance exists as regulations to prevent fraud that would otherwise be ever-present, crypto's lack of that is just revealing why they were necessary in the first place, "crypto speedrunning the financial system".
"EA has both fraudsters and people willing to go along with them in it" isn't surprising, it's expected. "Being willing to do morally gray / black things is associated with success in crypto" also isn't surprising, it's expected. EA doesn't need to have any causal impact on the fraud for it to happen.
And - say one believes that HFT is just a legal way of taking other peoples' money via financial alchemy. Is what sam did really worse than that? Are SBF's ethics materially worse than those of a fast food company or 'actively managed fund' CEO, or are they just less well regulated?
To be clear - I'm not arguing sam isn't bad, and I'm not arguing EA is based, just that people who otherwise dislike EA (which I may also for very different reasons!) are using this to prove EA BAD in the same way that, like, iraq or epstein proves (from different angles) LIBS ARE MORALLY BANKRUPT, despite it not really connecting to their initial reasons for disliking it.
FTX is EA's only big anything, because nothing else EA has done has captured mainstream attention like FTX has.
My sense is that EA does not lack for scandals (CFAR and MIRI are basically walking scandals), they're just not big enough to be interesting, and it feels kind of unsportsmanlike to publicize them, because they're basically all about maladjusted misfits hurting themselves and one another.
Can you clarify what you mean here? I thought MIRI just wrote not very exciting math papers and CFAR is just another self help seminars for $5000 program.
Check this shit out (hat tip @DaseindustriesLtd). I don't know the objective truth behind the accusations, but there's more than enough grist for CFAR/MIRI to get absolutely dragged by the mainstream press if they had anywhere near the public prominence or power that FTX had.
Actual specifics I've identified in this story:
A mentally ill person who did psychadelics thinks MIRI is like Leverage and currently has assorted vague mental illness symptoms similar to the typical tiktok "I'm mentally ill" influencer.
Said mentally ill person attributes their mental problems to MIRI. "I had paranoid fantasies about a MIRI executive assassinating me...."
Multiple people at CFAR had mental health issues. One person took a seminar then did some crimes.
The word "corruption" is used with no specifics.
"I had disagreements...and there was quite a lot of effort to convince me of their position..." :O
Some anti-CFAR protesters were unruly and local cops in a rural area got really excited about trying out their SWAT gear: https://sfist.com/2019/11/19/four-people-in-guy-fawkes-masks-scare-sonoma-retreat/
"I was certainly socially discouraged from revealing things that would harm the “brand” of MIRI and CFAR, by executive people." :O
Leverage leverage leverage, it was like leverage. Did you hear leverage was bad? I want some of the attention that leverage girl got.
The allegations against Leverage are equally non-specific and mostly come down to "I didn't get the social status I was seeking."
https://medium.com/@zoecurzi/my-experience-with-leverage-research-17e96a8e540b
I do agree that some of these folks would be better off attending church than CFAR.
The object level really doesn't matter at all here. As I said, there's plenty of fodder for the mainstream press to write one scandalous story after another, leaving CFAR/MIRI completely radioactive. The reason they haven't -- truly the only reason -- is that CFAR/MIRI doesn't matter enough to be worth their while to do it. But they would, the instant it achieved apparent success anything like FTX did.
Sorry you're right, I misinterpreted your claim as actually asserting that CFAR/MIRI were doing something scandalous as opposed to merely claiming the media might invent something.
As a claim about the media, I agree. But if the media wants to hit someone, they don't need actual material - they already did that to polite white boys who defend themselves against violent criminals or who stand around doing nothing at all (all captured on video from multiple angles).
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link