What's going on here is that unrelated libertarian principles are being recoded as issues of free speech. All of sudden preventing algorithmic harm becomes leftist censorship, and the culture war is used as a bulwark against government regulation of discriminatory technologies.

"Algorithmic decisions about parole, loan approvals, interest rates, program admissions, insurance premiums, security clearance, etc. that depend on race and ethnicity? That's not discrimination, it's *speech*."

@ct_bergstrom

And he's funding Post, which in itself is enough for me to stay clear of that platform.

@Mikal @ct_bergstrom I had no idea. What a shame. I was looking forward to writing there.
@adamjcook @Mikal @ct_bergstrom
Mr. Cook, if you listen to podcasts and are curious about the origins, ownership and motivations of Post, you may want to hear this conversation with Post founder Noam Bardin. He addresses the Andreeson Horowitz investment. It begins at the 42:21 mark.
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pivot/id1073226719?i=1000587110492
‎Pivot: Bob One Returns, Trump Can Tweet Again, and Guest Noam Bardin on Post News on Apple Podcasts

‎Show Pivot, Ep Bob One Returns, Trump Can Tweet Again, and Guest Noam Bardin on Post News - Nov 22, 2022

Apple Podcasts

@patrickgillam @Mikal @ct_bergstrom Thank you sharing. I just listened to it.

(Feel free to call me Adam.)

I love the mission of Post but I am going to need to see more details on the extent of this investment, moderation and governance.

Andreessen has nodded to “Pravda-like” designs in the past (as has Musk) that would artificially favor their viewpoints, and only their viewpoints.

I cannot invest in that without far more clarity.