Gods Don't Give Gifts has two writers, eleven voice actors, four composers, nine core creatives, and a five person post-prod team (including a foley artist). 9+ months of work.

今ホテルの朝食食べてたら黒人の女二人が「アジアンがいる最悪」とか指差してきやがって、一人の女が頭に変なシャワーキャップみたいな布被ってるから「どうしたの？ここシャワーないよ？」って答えたら「この差別主義者！」とか怒り出して草。お前ら野猿に人間様の5つ星ホテルは100年早いんだよボケ

Yudkowsky: “there’s no way an infant has qualia at birth” What I want to draw attention to here is not the horror of this, but the extreme overconfidence about something as poorly understood as consciousness. Take this into account when judging his other confident assertions.

Imagine a guy in a fedora and transition lenses, who’s also part of a “vegan rationalist polycule” in SF, starts breathlessly ranting to you about how AI is going to destroy humanity. That’s literally what’s happening… act accordingly.

Terence Tao gets a tiny taste of what the average American worker went through when we offshored all their factory jobs to China and imported 100M foreigners to take whatever jobs were left, and he immediately decides that all technological progress must cease and Heaven and Earth must move so that he can keep his job. In fact he’s not even really getting a taste, since even after AI has made him useless, he will still be rich and famous. He will probably never turn to fentanyl or drink himself to death in despair of ever providing for his family. A good reminder that the “elites” who destroyed this country are the most cowardly and self-centered people to ever exist.

This post looks like the start of a VERY sophisticated and well-funded PR operation to get support for Democrats to regulate AI into oblivion. Let me show you how it works: 1.) This guy, with minimal followers and no previous account activity, goes to the Wall Street Journal which publishes an exclusive with quotes from him on his resignation 18 minutes BEFORE this post goes up. Planning was clearly done in advance. 2.) Within hours, it has tens of thousands of reposts and the account has 100k+ followers. The post is punchy, quotable, it almost seems professionally written. The first three accounts to quote tweet it all do so within 15 minutes of the initial posting. Remember, this account had basically zero engagement beforehand, so an organic reach explanation seems unlikely. According to Grok those accounts are @_NathanCalvin (General Counsel at Encode AI), @peterwildeford (Head of Policy at the AI Policy Network), and @DKokotajlo (Head of the AI Futures Project), all of which are up-and-coming AI-Doomer policy advocacy nonprofits. The AI Futures Project website says it is funded “primarily” by the Survival and Flourishing Fund, which says on its own website that it has advised Jaan Tallinn, Skype creator and one of the leading investors in Anthropic, to grant over $2.5 million to the AI Futures Project since 2024. Encode AI says on its website that it is ALSO funded by the Survival and Flourishing Fund, which in turn says that it told Anthropic investor Jaan Tallinn to grant $516,000 to Encode AI in 2025. And wouldn’t you know it, the Survival and Flourishing Fund ALSO says it told Jaan Tallinn to grant $2 million to the AI Policy Institute, the 501(c)(3) affiliate of the AI Policy Network, as well. What are the odds that the first three quote tweets of Coxon’s post would all be major AI-restriction policy advocates funded generously by the same donor, who also happens to be one of the leading investors in, and a board member of, Anthropic, the company Coxon was resigning from? And all within 15 minutes of posting (two within ten)? 3.) Jacob Coxon doesn’t have much of a resume, but we do know that, in 2022, he got a $20,159 scholarship for the “long term future scholarship program” from the Good Ventures Foundation, one of the philanthropic vehicles of Dustin Moskovitz, a notorious AI-doomer who has spent tens if not hundreds of millions on policy advocacy to strictly regulate AI, while also being an Anthropic Investor himself. It also just so happens that the 14th person to quote Coxon’s post was @MaxNadeau_ (27 minutes after posting) who is the program officer for the Technical AI Safety team at Coefficient Giving, another of Moskovitz’s philanthropic spending vehicles. Max is not a frequent poster, his last posts before quoting Coxon were before Labor Day, but he was remarkably quick off the mark for this one. 4.) Basically every major Democrat politician and candidate has suddenly glommed on to this post, and conveniently, as the people cry out foe answers, Bernie Sanders already has a bill written to “ban super intelligence” and regulate AI into oblivion, and will be releasing later this week. The bill, among many other things, will create “a new cabinet-level federal agency to safeguard the public from the dangers of artificial intelligence” that will be “advised by an Artificial Intelligence Advisory Board comprised of experts on artificial intelligence.” Do you think, perhaps, Anthropic and its many investors who fund AI policy advocacy might have interest in getting to place a pet “expert” on the board of an entity that dictates what AI is and isn’t allowed to do? And isn’t it fortuitous that this whistleblower came forward with his oh-so scary stories so close in proximity to the release of the most radical piece of AI legislation ever introduced?

When I was young, women were a source of inspiration for us. We started bands, worked out and tried dress cool, and worked 70 hours a week to have money to take them on cool dates. When they broke our hearts, we made films; wrote songs; became comedians. Women in 2026 are mentally ill shrubbery: I barely notice it the first time, and don’t care if I ever see it again. There is no light or magic in their eyes. Their voices are nails on a chalkboard. Their bodies are neglected playgrounds with busted creaky springs. They’re never looking at you. They now only look at themselves. They’ve become sad, lifeless husks of human beings; obsessed with shiny things and that next incremental fraction of attention. This is why art sucks and homosexuality is on the rise. Our muses saw themselves and became stone.

Amusingly they’re continuing to spam Le “you’re not logical” while simultaneously arguing from feelings. These quippy little one-liners intend to suggest you’re hunter gatherer valueless, and feel smart to say, so they’re true ™. Their “argument” is “nuh uh” and “erm that just like, wouldn’t work mkay?” and “erm, that’s just like, politically suicidal”. These one liners essentially say “I feel like it wouldn’t work because it’s like, a big thing”. They don’t have anything to support that rationally or empirically. If you were to ask “according to what” they wouldn’t have an answer. It’s even more amusing the extent of the idea of “how hard” it is, because dummies perpetually operate in external locus of control. It can’t actually be “that hard” or that monumental because there are 20+ amendments ratified then revoked. You can in fact just do these things. The grandest irony is the 19th was ratified during a time where women were supposedly in cages or something. A small group of women just bitch moaned enough and they got it, even with other women against them. Somehow that was possible, but turning it back would be voodoo.

This is cope. We get laid. Our women love us. Stay mad.

“Could the misogynists please stop weaponizing the constant unrelenting stream of women’s behavior that vindicates their worldview”

Your car should self destruct if it’s worth $75,000+ and you’re driving less than 10mph above the speed limit. I’m making an assumption when I choose to get behind a Mercedes at a stop light. I’m using my lived experience to choose this lane instead of the one with the Subaru. I’m employing deductive reasoning in order to maximize the efficiency of my travel. So when you are slow to accelerate upon the light turning green and then you also do not even achieve the 45mph speed limit within 30 seconds you’ve done something completely unforgivable. When you do that you’ve made a direct threat on my life. You’ve upset the natural order. A cheetah does not tiptoe to its destination. And you’re driving 39 in a 50 in an M3? You’re lucky I don’t run you off the road. You’re lucky my car has a government installed killswitch and infrared facial recognition camera pointed at the drivers seat. You aren’t safe anymore

> foid claims she's romantic > ask if she's genuinely romantic or merely constantly sees herself as the object of romance > "what do you mean" > explain the difference between engaging in romantic gestures and overtures, and imagining yourself as the recipient of romantic gestures from others > "I'm very romantic, sir" > look inside > she's the object of romance

God grant me the confidence of a clueless woman talking about what she thinks women want.

It’s insane to see 1984 tier revisionism and gaslighting happen universally in this country. I don’t remember seeing taco street vendors on every corner when I was a kid. LA has not always been this “little Mexico” situation, it was 90% white like 40 years ago. But all of this history has been erased and replaced with “actually every metro has always been a brown shithole and you MUST tolerate and encourage it”

They want all the groceries in one bag. But they don't want the bag to be heavy.