"Conservative" can mean a lot of things.
Tolkien didn't have anything particularly useful to contribute to politics and nobody should be using him as a guide to anything... but nonetheless there'd have been no limit to the layers of Tolkien's contempt for somebody like Peter Thiel.
How about empathy for the other people they'll make miserable if you encourage their worldview , and maybe the people they'll make miserable if you further embitter them?
It's really not clear to me how MAGA people getting scammed will encourage their world view, or that there's meaningful room for further embittering them. Maybe, but perhaps they'll be discouraged! Or perhaps they'll have less money to give to actually sincere MAGA activists who will do something bad with it!
To be clear, I don't think the law should tolerate scams of this kind, or that policy should encourage them in any way. But empathy for the victims is an ask on top of policy, and "maybe there will be some bad indirect effects" is a weak argument for it.
> It's really not clear to me how MAGA people getting scammed will encourage their world view,
Young MAGA-adjacent dumbass who can't get laid sees pretty girl spouting MAGA stuff, reads all her posts and follows her or whatever, The Algorithm(TM) feeds him more MAGA stuff and MAGA posters, his whole social and information environment becomes that much more MAGA. Works even if he knows from the beginning that she's AI, but just likes the eye candy.
> or that there's meaningful room for further embittering them.
Young dumbass who can't get laid sends money, doesn't get the engagement he wants and/or realizes she's AI, can't accept feeling stupid, further projects his problems onto everything and everybody outside of himself, seeks out material that enourages him to do that...
A few months of restricting access to people they think will actually fix problems is a big deal. Obviously only an idiot would think it could or should be kept under wraps forever.
> The whole artificial scarcity Anthropic created around Mythos / Glasswing is quite brilliant to be honest (I’m Not saying ethical, just brilliant). The commercial gains are one side of course.
You mean the obvious commercial losses caused by keeping an expensively created product effectively off the market altogether?
What the actual fuck is with people who come up with stuff like this?
Especially annoying because if I remember correctly people gave Google some irreplaceable backup tapes on the promise that there'd be a complete archive, and within a couple of years it'd turned into Google Groups...
> That's nice, but the rest of us didn't accept anything to agree to provide a legal system that would enforce it... and there's no reason we should.
This is exactly the kind of response with the right amount of flippancy/belligerence that "they aren't/weren't forced to sign" deserves to be met with.
We have a system of laws that decide which private contracts are enforceable and which are not. So we can try to change the law but as it stands we have decided that this one is enforceable.
FWIW I agree about not enforcing non disparagement clauses but legally that not the world we live in.
"we" is a strong word here. More like some people 50-80 years ago decided to at worst rule against the worker's best interest, and at best chose to ignore it and pretend things would work out with a "gentlemans' agreement".
reply