site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1d ago (text post)   4740 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of June 15, 2026

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.

2
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

We're actually supposed to want more from our government than to be thin skinned retards who don't listen to people who know what the fuck is going on. In any way that this is embarrasing for anthropic it is many times more so for the admin. If some moron told Eisenhower that the test of the bomb were going to reverse the flow of gravity and Eisenhower demands Oppenheimer to fix that problem to fix that made up problem what exactly is he supposed to do besides explain that there is nothing to fix and in fact we already told you this would happen. The level of abject retardation people are willing to accept from the Trump admin and then criticize people for not going along with it is absurd and their toddler tantrums are a threat to our national security.

If there was a 10% chance that the H-bomb would reverse gravity, and Eisenhower told Oppenheimer to fix it, and Oppenheimer said, "I can't. That's just what H-bombs do." Then yes, Eisenhower's job would be to stop the test and put the entire department on administrative leave.

Amusingly, this isn't what happened. It was even in Oppenheimer!

I can imagine a world where the 2015 MIRI Corrigibility paper came out the other way. Then we could point at the math and say, “See! Nothing to worry about.” We do not live in tht world.

While in full support and without any plans to regulate or stop the other several H-bomb teams?

edit: If trump is fully yudd pilled and his next action is to start pushing bilateral treaties then I'll celebrate, but he's not we all know that he's not.

As a response to @magicalkittycat below as well:

An administration official told Axios they do not view other models as national security threats because they do not surpass the bar that Mythos set.

Anything at Mythos level or above would need to go through the administration to ensure the government's national security apparatus is hardened enough, the official added.

It seems that the USG is at least nominally interested in regulating models from the other H-bomb teams as well, and one of the claimed reasons that Anthropic is being targeted is because they're considered to be the ones with the strongest model worthy of regulation. Source.

Perhaps you don't trust the administration when they say this - it's hard to know what the second-hand effects of these expert controls are going to be, and this could certainly have been handled better by both parties. Still, if you're concerned about doom and would prefer increased regulation to try and avert doom, this seems to be at least a potential step towards something better.

In an ideal world we would have a council of LKY clones making maximally technocratic decisions, but we live in the world that we live in and nobody else is going to be stepping in.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats