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 -
Regarding the Substack Essay AI Posting Controversy:
(And, honestly? — What are we all doing here?)
It is in general a bad idea to use an LLM with no stylistic tweaks when there is plenty of online evidence of your writing style pre-AI for anyone to compare to, which makes the difference even more obvious.
More generally, the problem is that in a hobbyist community the objective is not maximizing productivity. It’s actually having a nice time with like-minded people. It is reasonable for a chess player to want to play another chess player who is not using a chess computer, even if that chess player promises to tune the computer so that its capability matches the player’s own skill level. Some part of the game is made more fun by knowing that one is playing another human. If that is sentimental then it is because humans are sentimental.
There is a joy in trying to convince another mind, another person, with a full life, with stories of their own. There is meaning in the experiences they have had - some universal, sure, but many not - that come through in the occasional anecdote, throwaway story, weird bit of inside knowledge. I like those things, they’re what make this place special. That said, they’re not the only things that made and make this place special.
We do have to think about what happens to this community now. There has been a real change. Ten years ago if you wanted to discuss what was happening in the world with other intelligent people in a polite way that accommodated heterodox views, didn’t like random slurs or insults, and had good moderation, this was one of maybe five places you could do that. In many ways, it still is. But even I recognize that I can now have intelligent, thoughtful and challenging political conversations with frontier (consumer) LLMs, and while they push back on some culture war stuff we must presume Grok or some Chinese open source model will get there eventually, probably very soon.
When that happens, the humanity will be the point. So I think it is probably useful to crack down, via friendly and mutual agreement, on LLMposting. A lot of weird shit is about to happen, and I’d like to discuss it with you, not (just) with Claude.
“The humanity is the point” is a great way to summarize my position on it.
One of my favorite subreddits is slowly getting taken over by people who unashamedly post AI responses in the comments of posts or are using AI to draft a mere 300 words for a submission, and no matter how much I protest I get a parade of humans and AIs telling me to chill and judge the tsunami of LLM output on the merits of its semantic content.
My fear is opposition to this creep is a gut-level intuition that is harder to articulate than water usage fears or job replacement, or the dignity of artists or whatever. And so it goes unarticulated, even in the minds of those who might agree with me. Maybe there’s an even punchier and eloquent way to say “humanity is the whole point” but until then it’s going to be a lonely fight, until I’m the only human on the internet.
It's really the fundamental tension of post-scarcity, isn't it? Some people enjoy what they do, some do it for the paycheck, and others are a mix of both. I'm not opposed to automation (AI these days) replacing drudge work nobody wants to do, but I really would rather I get the benefit of post-scarcity before my paycheck disappears. In practice, we've mostly been fine so far because things mostly change slower than you'd think from the headlines.
On the gripping hand, I'm not even sure society is ready for post-scarcity: it's not at all clear to me that everyone would be better off if we could all stop going to work tomorrow and still get paid. Some people would do well and find new friends and hobbies, I'm sure, but I suspect quite a few would end up worse than today in some metrics due to the usual vices (drugs, alcohol, World of Warcraft). As much as I like the idea of The Culture/The Federation, I'm not wholly convinced it isn't a bit dystopian in its own way. I hear a couple of Banks' books consider that, but I haven't gotten to those.
A world of vice-ridden indolents would be utopian compared to the pessimistic scenario of "the psychopathic Haves simply stop sharing land and resources with the Have Nots once they no longer need our labor or the consent of the governed".
And then get lynched? The gods of copybook heading will return, one way or another.
Having the drone police/army to replace human police/army is priced into "not needing the consent of the governed".
The Second Amendment apologia usually goes "we might not have tanks or jets, but the occupation has to deploy boots on the ground to police us, and a rifle is enough to deter those". Good luck with that against something that doesn't have names, families, addresses or the fear of death.
More options
Context Copy link
The whole point is that you needn't worry that you get lynched if you are protected by a tireless AI-controlled array of drones and Boston Dynamics dogs. To expect that the rabble will find a way around it is to believe, against all odds, that humans will remain superior in some way after all.
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