this post was submitted on 05 Jan 2024
20 points (100.0% liked)

SneerClub

982 readers
9 users here now

Hurling ordure at the TREACLES, especially those closely related to LessWrong.

AI-Industrial-Complex grift is fine as long as it sufficiently relates to the AI doom from the TREACLES. (Though TechTakes may be more suitable.)

This is sneer club, not debate club. Unless it's amusing debate.

[Especially don't debate the race scientists, if any sneak in - we ban and delete them as unsuitable for the server.]

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 21 points 10 months ago (5 children)

If I were to transition today and didn't pass as well as Jessica, and everyone felt obligated to call me a woman, they would be wireheading me: making me think my transition was successful, even though it wasn't.

This is the same fuckin' diseased mentality that gets cis women harassed in changing rooms for having jawlines that are slightly too heavy.

The math is also weird and unclear in that way which feels like a person reaching for grandiose Theories Of It All without any experience solving more mundane problems first.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

🎶 I see the girls go by dressed in their summer clothes / Priors all updating until my darkness goes 🎶

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago

Exactly. Yeah some trans women really don’t pass, some cis women don’t either. Nobody benefits from increased scrutiny on people’s gender except people selling fear of trans people or selling the tools to conform to gendered expectations.

But also if you’re unhappy with your meat sack change it because there’s no evidence you get another.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Three major thoughts here: 1) this is the epitome of toxic individualism, 2) holy hell this person really needs to leave rationalism for their own health and happiness, 3) I love the idea that anyone can insist on quoting Ray “doesn’t believe in bisexuality” Blanchard while calling themselves a person focused on truth

This person is clearly struggling with who they are and has decided they don’t get to be themselves and is working back from there

[–] [email protected] 15 points 10 months ago

And I just want to clarify my beef with Blanchard. It’s not just that he’s wrong about me and people I care about in ways that are hurtful, prejudiced, and used to cause harm. It’s also the fact that he’s held up by a certain type of person because they can’t be bothered to understand us or science. Sometimes in science one lone person speaks truth to a field that irrationally digs in their heels and refuses to see reason. I understand that. But sometimes some jackass looks identical to that and just happens to be wrong and using terrible methodology and because people outside the field don’t understand shit they latch on because the field is saying things that go against their preconceived notions and that person sounds kinda right.

Ray Blanchard is the Andrew Wakefield of sexology and a certain type of people insist he’s Galileo in that story that’s usually oversimplified because it makes for a better story than telling it truthfully.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 10 months ago (1 children)

LWers will literally

Instead of going to therapy

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Suppose there are five true heresies, but anyone who's on the record as believing more than one gets burned as a witch.

Two heresies leave Chicago traveling at 90 km/h and 100 km/h

Jessica asked if Yudkowsky denouncing neoreaction and the alt-right would still seem harmful, if he were to also to acknowledge, e.g., racial IQ differences?

uh

I agreed that that would be better, but realistically, I didn't see why Yudkowsky should want to poke that hornet's nest.

uhhhhhhhhh

[–] [email protected] 21 points 10 months ago

a perfectly spherical heresy in a vacuum at absolute zero, and also it's racist

[–] [email protected] 13 points 10 months ago (7 children)

104 minutes! Not today satan.

A ctrl+f on 'sneer' shows me a lot of talking about sneerclub, but guess he didn't actually check reddit and notice that it is no longer there.

And of course the guy is some weird anti pronouns person. ('But somebody might look how you not expect them to look!')

[–] [email protected] 13 points 10 months ago (3 children)

The hilarious part to me is that they imagine Eliezer moderates himself or self-censors particularly in response to sneerclub. Like of all the possible reasons why Eliezer may not want to endorse transphobic rhetoric about pronouns (concern about general PR besides sneerclub, a more complex nuanced understanding of language, or even genuine compassion for trans people), sneerclubs disapproval is the one that sticks out to the author. I guess good job on us? Keep it up!

[–] [email protected] 13 points 10 months ago

Every sneer is one transphobic act suppressed in fear.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I’m amazed that the random shitposting of a bunch of nerds who band together purely to dunk on terrible rationalist takes weighs so heavily on their minds. Aren’t they supposed to be above that kind of thing?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago

They are not really talking about us, they are talking about an imagined group of badguys, for all their talks about intellectual turing tests they fail the most basic ones at their own detractors. This does however worry my paranoid mind, as this does mean that the more deranged parts of Rationalism might try and take action against people from sneerclub. I have no desire to be doxed and then have weird LW/EA kids from local universities visit my home. (or make working in tech harder for me).

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 10 months ago (2 children)

^F David Gerard

Imagine one day David Gerard of /r/SneerClub said, "Eliezer Yudkowsky is a white supremacist!" And you replied: "No, I'm not! That's a lie." And imagine E.T. Jaynes was still alive...

I‘m impressed at the way you still manage to live rent free in these chud’s heads. The bogeyman is real if you’re a rationalist apparently & his name is D.Gerard.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 10 months ago

/r/SneerClub

these people are so terrified of Satan Church that they haven’t read the change of address we stabbed into the front door with a ceremonial dagger like 5 months ago

[–] [email protected] 10 points 10 months ago (7 children)

Imagine one day Dan Gackle of Hacker News fame banned the Linus Tech Tips guy for sockpuppeting but actually you were the sockpuppet. Also suppose Terry A. Davis were still alive so you went to ask him how to sockpuppet like a veteran, but instead you run into Timnit Gebru, who is also a terrorist. She calls you pronouns and slurs like TESCREAL and your pants drop to your ankles and everyone is laughing at you and also Terry calls you the N word because you don't know how to write a compiler. Then you turn around and see Scott Siskind and Joanne Rowling and they're also laughing at you and you start to cry.

Anyway you'd be really upset.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 10 months ago (1 children)

My dayjob performance had been suffering for months. The psychology of the workplace is ... subtle. There's a phenomenon where some people are vastly more productive than others and everyone knows it, but no one is cruel enough to make it common knowledge. This is awkward for people who simultaneously benefit from the culture of common-knowledge-prevention allowing them to collect the status and money rents of being a $150K/year software engineer without actually performing at that level, who also read enough Ayn Rand as a teenager to be ideologically opposed to subsisting on unjustly-acquired rents rather than value creation. I didn't think the company would fire me, but I was worried that they should.

My goodness is there anything about this person's outlook that isn't profoundly sad.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

They’re up to their armpits in a pit of self-loathing of their own making & unable to take any of the proffered help because their self-imposed ethical system doesn’t permit it.

Profoundly sad is exactly what it is.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 10 months ago

God it feels so fucking good not knowing who any of these idiots are, time to ruin that feeling forever

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago

jesus christ

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago

Rationalist Civil War was my least favorite Marvel movie.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

Going through random pages of Zack's blog, which I don't recommend unless you really like to look at self-harm, which you shouldn't, ... sometimes you find passages that make you remember the important things and you feel a little less bad about all the mess.

(The really hard part is overcoming the improbability of finding a wife who I could love and who could love me, and who is enthusiastic about starting a family qua eugenics project rather than merely qua family. Any single (cis) women reading this who like my writing: please, don't hesitate to write me!)


Also this one's really just kind of cute.

I continue to maintain that fandom conventions are boring. I enjoy consuming fiction. I even enjoy discussing fiction with friends—the work facilitating a connection with someone else present, rather than just between me and the distant author, or me and the universe of stories. But for the most part, these big, bustling conventions just don't seem to facilitate that kind of intimacy. [...]

But that's okay. Ultimately, I did not come to Fan Expo San Francisco 2022 for the intimacy of analyzing fiction with friends who know me.

I came because of the loophole. As reactionary as it might seem in the current year, I am spiritually a child of the 20th century, and I do not crossdress in public. That would be weird. (Not harmlessly weird as an adjective of unserious self-deprecation, but weird in the proper sense, out-of-distribution weird.)

But to cosplay as a fictional character who happens to be female? That's fine! Lots of people are dressed up as fictional characters at the convention, including characters who belong to categories that the cosplayer themself does not. That guy dressed up as a vampire isn't actually a vampire, either.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 10 months ago

@Amoeba_Girl @dgerard Sometimes I think there's a goldmine of comedy to be had laughing at these eugenics types having kids and slowly realizing they aren't rich like Musk and Grimes and have to care for these humans. Then I remember that isn't funny at all, it's extremely upsetting.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

well, cute for someone who would transition to a trans neoreactionary

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

(Follows link to authors blog, reads blogroll)

JFC. Kathleen Stock. They have the entire universe of gender studies to choose from & Kathleen Stock is their philosopher of choice.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago (16 children)

The thing that gets me the most about this is they can't imagine that Eliezer might genuinely be in favor of inclusive language, and thus his use of people's preferred pronouns must be a deliberate calculated political correctness move and thus in violation of the norms espoused by the sequences (which the author takes as a given the Eliezer has never broken before, and thus violating his own sequences is some sort of massive and unique problem).

To save you all having to read the rant...

—which would have been the end of the story, except that, as I explained in a subsequent–subsequent post, "A Hill of Validity in Defense of Meaning", in late 2018, Eliezer Yudkowsky prevaricated about his own philosophy of language in a way that suggested that people were philosophically confused if they disputed that men could be women in some unspecified metaphysical sense.

Also, bonus sneer points, developing weird terminology for everything, referring to Eliezer and Scott as the Caliphs of rationality.

Caliphate officials (Eliezer, Scott, Anna) and loyalists (Steven) were patronizingly consoling me

One of the top replies does call this like it is...

A meaningful meta-level reply, such as "dude, relax, and get some psychological help" will probably get me classified as an enemy, and will be interpreted as further evidence about how sick and corrupt is the mainstream-rationalist society.

load more comments (16 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (17 children)

Someone asked in the comments that Zack clarify wtf the claim is, and Zack posted this abstract:

Does this help? (159 words and one hyperlink to a 16-page paper)

Empirical Claim: late-onset gender dysphoria in males is not an intersex condition.

Summary of Evidence for the Empirical Claim: see "Autogynephilia and the Typology of Male-to-Female Transsexualism: Concepts and Controversies" by Anne Lawrence, published in European Psychologist. (Not by me!)

Philosophical Claim: categories are useful insofar as they compress information by "carving reality at the joints"; in particular, whether a categorization makes someone happy or sad is not relevant.

Sociological Claim: the extent to which a prominence-weighted sample of the rationalist community has refused to credit the Empirical or Philosophical Claims even when presented with strong arguments and evidence is a reason to distrust the community's collective sanity.

Caveat to the Sociological Claim: the Sociological Claim about a prominence-weighted sample of an amorphous collective doesn't reflect poorly on individual readers of lesswrong.com who weren't involved in the discussions in question and don't even live in America, let alone Berkeley.

so this is a two-hour post about Zack's arguments with unnamed Bay Area rationalists. Today, in posts that should have been a Discord chat.

(the paper he names is a Blancharding ramble)

[–] [email protected] 11 points 10 months ago

Sociological Claim: the extent to which a prominence-weighted sample of the rationalist community has refused to credit the Empirical or Philosophical Claims even when presented with strong arguments and evidence is a reason to distrust the community’s collective sanity.

Zack my guy you are so fucking close. Also just fucking leave.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 10 months ago

One day, when Zack is a little older, I hope he learns it's okay to sometimes talk -to someone- instead of airing one's identity confusion like an arxiv prepublish paper.

Like, it's okay to be confused in a weird world, or even have controversial opinions. Make some friends you can actually trust, aren't demanding bayesian defenses of feelings, and chat this shit out buddy.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 10 months ago (8 children)

And the arguments seem to boil down to them saying "if you wanna transition, just do it", and Zack is all like "nooooooo you must convince me not to via Rationality!!!!"

(sorry if I'm being flippant, this person seems to be in a lot of mental distress, but they're also kinda big deal in the community? Like fucking gwern weighed in a bit sarcastically?)

[–] [email protected] 10 points 10 months ago

Who knows? They seem to know all these people personally, so I guess they attend rationalist cuddle puddles in SV or something.

I ran into them online a year ago when a Twitter follow shared their last essay with some acerbic comments about the lengths (both in the mental & absurd word count senses) they were going to do deny their desire to transition & they appeared in the comments after I made a snarky remark along the lines of “methinks the lady doth protest too much”. Still quite proud of that one.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›