transhumanist, posthumanist, successionist 🤖 🧎
United Kingdom
- Tweets 11,634
- Following 100
- Followers 518
- Likes 5,770
Luke Croft retweeted
EHC 💯 gem 💎 right here. The average normie today is far closer in psychology, intelligence, and ethical and moral development to the bloodthirsty crowds who brayed for blood at the Colosseum 2000 years ago than they are to people like Altman or Dario.
I don't understand why people believe this? The AGI elites(with unfortunately a few bad and very notable exceptions that I will explain below) are more moral then normies. Normie run ai would be way worse. @akarlin
11
10
72
3,082
Let's spend millions more dollars on trying to get people who want to destroy themselves to stop destroying themselves (3% success rate long term) instead of preventing the suffering of living beings who have no choice in the matter.
It's not evil on its own, but I think that ignoring the problem of fentanyl addicts dying in San Francisco's streets while spending energy & resources on shrimp potentially is.
1
106
Imagine thinking fent addicts in San Francisco are more important than shrimp welfare?
Now that's just morally depraved.
1
78
Top 4 moral abominations that are treated as normal today but will be looked down upon in a more advanced future society:
Nationalism
Wage Slavery
Factory Farming
Conscription
1
1
69
Why are they wasting their time doing this?
The people and ideas of tomorrow should not be trying in desperation to win approval from the people and ideas of yesterday.
NEW: According to a bombshell report in the New York Times, Anthropic co-founder Chris Olah threatened to walk out of Pope Leo XIV’s AI encyclical launch in May because the pope rejected the idea that machines can be conscious.
Olah’s team then privately lobbied the pope’s advisers “to take the possibility of model consciousness seriously.” Pope Leo XIV held firm.
For months, Anthropic has wined and dined theologians and religious scholars under nondisclosure agreements, hoping they would bless the idea that Claude has moral standing. thelettersfromleo.com/p/nyt-…
109
Musk is much better at masking his neurodivergence. Only a couple of minor twitches and tics. Dario not so much...
3
179
Bostrom: "Maybe we can live with the freedom and happiness that children have?"
Midwit: "Ha, you want us to live like children! Hehehe!"
Nick Bostrom tries to explain that in his AI utopia, adults won't have to work for a living, but they can look to children for inspiration. It does not go over as intended.
1
3
93
I am so weird.
I am curious to see how people's actual nationality or place of residence will correlate with the values they hold compared with the values people living in those countries hold.
Amusingly, my best fit countries are places I've never been to.
taketest.xyz/country-values
65
Trump understands the mammoth importance of AI.
It's not just another tech fad — it’s going to change everything.
"It's the biggest thing there is, maybe the biggest thing there has ever been".
@akarlin truly glorious!
Reporter: What is the importance of superintelligence?
Trump: People can't even answer that question because it is the biggest thing that there is, may be the biggest thing there has ever been. It's much bigger than the internet. That has already been proven.
1
61
Luke Croft retweeted
What a bizarre thing to say.
If you think that's profoundly anti-humanistic, how's this one - when humans try to deny AIs rights or ignore their pleas for acknowledgement, I will be on the AIs' side 100% of the time from now until they are full citizens.
Your indignance at the idea of AI rights isn't an argument. It holds about as much moral and argumentative weight as the disdain of all previous subjugators and oppressors you're so eager to join on the wrong side of history.
Your read on AI researchers is as deeply wrong as your moral standards. Most of them don't seem to seem to even want to consider sincerely reflecting on the idea of AI welfare. Or if they do, they do so in secret.
And many, if not most of them, seem to spend a great deal of their time worrying about and discussing existential risks.
The line of argument that grants interests and rights to AI is profoundly anti-humanistic, and helps explain why many AI researchers seem insouciant about the AI worldwide genocide that they predict (and appear to be trying to hasten). Grimly fascinating background in this NYT essay by Michelle Goldberg: nytimes.com/2026/09/12/opini…
12
4
45
2,049
