site banner
PaperclipPerfector  2d ago (text post)   10122 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of November 9, 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.

5
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I'm not too confident but I think it might be the opposite in phase 1 and generally.

(Human) speed might be what matters most. Speed of recognizing opportunities, speed in drafting and creating and redrafting and giving directives, testing, iterating, marketing, learning new things. Agents work fast, they can do months of work in weeks. I'm trying to use agent swarms right now and get my money's worth and it is quite stressful managing multiple projects at the same time, reviewing what's been done and issuing good instructions. There's no time for further collaboration between people on top of that.

By the time all the meetings and collaboration is finished, the opportunity is already gone! When work automates, the scope for competition increases dramatically (outside the govt sector at least). As tempo increases, the longhouse declines, decisions shall need to be made quickly and finally by a single actor.

Also, men have an innate advantage with AI in that they're more interested in machines and technology, whereas women are more into people. Nearly all techbros and early adopters and entrepreneurs are men. Men tend to be more pro-AI and pro-datacentre.

Switching from process-driven procedural and human-facing work to freeform instruction-giving, directorial work with machines favours men I think.

pro-datacentre

Some people seem to really hate datacentres. Can someone steelman this for me?

There's niche, addressable issues like local power/water prices (and I'm not sure I understand the water argument as it should be reusable just like in your desktop rig) and the infrasonic hum that can apparently cause anxiety over the long term. Outside of that though, it just seems like the phobia over anything nuclear.

Is this just a subconscious projection of a fear of change and obsolescence? I can't imagine seeing the first railroads go down during industrialisation and decrying the whole thing (unless maybe you're a part of the teamsters union).

Well we are introducing a new kind of intelligent life to a world we currently rule thanks to our intelligence, there are clear risks. You don't see many Neanderthals wandering around, it may be that There Can Only Be One. And these strange entities live in datacentres, that's their habitat. Why give up our habitat for theirs?

Also many people hate change. It was thought that the terrifying speeds of early railroads would drive people insane.

(and I'm not sure I understand the water argument as it should be reusable just like in your desktop rig)

Some datacenters in desert areas used evaporative coolers. That does use a substantial amount of water, in an arid area no less.

Then the media and academia did its thing, and now the public believes that it's an issue for all datacenters in all climates.

People hate AI because they can sense that it is going to impoverish and disempower them and destroy their lives and futures, and datacentres are the tangible thing that "is" AI, that best pattern matches to the tangible thing in previous issues, and is the main lever they think they have do anything about it.

Another big thing that's breaking out now is to personally abstain from using any AI and become hostile to anybody that doesn't, as a core identity issue.

Still seems like there's a missing mass feeling to become hostile to the people making it, I don't entirely understand why that still hasn't manifested at popular strength yet.

Its understandable that if a huge technological wave is coming and you don't know how to surf that you'd be against it.

I think its just a relatively small group that really knows that AI is coming for their jobs. Creatives are the most up front about this, trying to establish a cartel where they will deny anyone that uses AI a space. Gaming has this too with Steam mandating AI use disclosure so people that hate AI can boycott the product (although this just doesn't work if the game is good). I don't think Steam cares about this, but they've neatly sidestepped the issue by letting the consumer make up their own minds.

As an aside there is currently a huge AI slopwave that has swamped the Steam platform, highlighted by the recent Steam Nextfest. This trend will probably continue for quite some time.

Anyway, the mass feeling might come as more mainstream professions are automated away. By the time we have PlumberBots crawling under your sink or into your toilet, the riots will be well and truly underway. YangGang 2038?

I think what has happened at quite a few data centers is bad planning and execution. So yes if you are just running power from the grid there will be minimal noise or pollution. But if you were a bit blase about grid electricity and just trying to get in on the boom, then you need to setup onsite power generation. Which usually takes the form of fossil fuel generators. Which are not quiet. And if you mess up you are spilling pollution as well, because you are basically running an industrial scale power generation facility without the planning or expertise that is usually deployed to run such a thing.

The other thing is that people want their money and their payoff. The perception of data centers is that they generate money for someone somewhere else. And if it comes up as a political question, ya of course people want their cut.

Railroads did have an issue if they just wanted to build through a town without adding a stop inside that town. Having a stop brought benefits, just using the land to run the rail through was not well liked.

From some articles I've seen local bribes compensation seems be the way forward.

Hope someone figures out nuclear SMRs to power these things. But then would SMRs get up and running by the time Elon exports all the compute into space?

Yes, but how many such men will we need? That was my point about winner-takes-all markets.

Why would these remaining superstars need a committee having endless meetings? Why would HR be needed for one guy and his swarm?

With the actual work mostly automated, the remaining management is free to spend even more time doing longhouse things.

I think management might just disintegrate along with all the old companies that can't manage the transition. They cost money and introduce sluggishness to an equilibrium that prizes speed. It will be a question of what the rockstars need, not what needs them. My experience trying to get AI adoption in a traditional company (for useful business tasks that save time directly) is like swimming in molasses, managers and workers do not want to do anything new or learn anything. It might take days and days for them to respond to my emails. I think these companies are going to die.

But again, I don't really know.

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