Oh. Looks like people are (once again) figuring out that silicon valley and effective altruism and longtermism and the rest are all bound up root to ass with eugenics and white supremacy.
So: Welcome to the party; there are a LOT of academics, researchers, and people with direct lived experience, already here.
@Wolven for the people just now discovering Silicon Valley's eugenics problem, there's an episode of Tech Won't Save Us that's a very good primer.
https://techwontsave.us/episode/155_the_untold_history_of_silicon_valley_w_malcolm_harris
I will say...
The moment I see/hear the terms "effective altruism" and/or "longtermism" from any entity in sincerity, I'm out. Finito.
You've embraced the lingo of the utter loon and are no longer worthy of my attention nor consideration.
Fuck right off.
Their names really do sound like cults/cons, like they're one step away from some horrible secret.
@Wolven Life got simpler once I realised that most political philosophies dreamed up by the privileged are an attempt to justify their privilege by ignoring its roots.
@Wolven
A lot of people in tech "know" that some "races" are more intelligent, or more violent etc. than others.
They think that it's a simple scientific fact which can be measured and reduced to numbers, and that mainstream society has simply decided it's not polite to talk about, the way we wouldn't stare at a person with a facial deformity or remark on someone with poor personal hygiene.
When they get together with other "rational" people who "know" these same things they feel free to say it out loud.
For anyone who doesn't know what 'effective #altruism' and '#longtermism' mean, there's a video by @rebeccawatson where she explains them - and why they are really fucking problematic - in simple terms.
@tine_schreibt @Wolven @rebeccawatson thanks for sharing this video! I think I mostly agree with it's contents, but it doesn't seem to say what you're saying.
The main culprit of the bad things discussed seems to be longtermism, which itself is a fairly extreme view, as well as an *extreme* adherence to effective altruism, and utilitarianism. She even summarizes at the end "moderation in all things" and "I still believe in critically evaluating the effectiveness of our charity", which does not suggest that effective altruism is an inherently problematic idea.
Anyways, I'm mostly sharing here because I must be missing some context about what recently occurred to spark this very vague thread, so if anyone has more resources explaining why effective altruism is bad, or what recently happened, please do share.
Now I'm confused.
Your criticism is comparable to: "This person explains why alcoholism and drunk driving are bad, but says that she doesn't demand a new prohibition, so it's not really a criticism of alcohol."
The extremes we see play out in society make the thing dangerous and very problematic and one needs to be aware of that. The moderate versions still have enough merit to warrant not discarding them entirely.
@tine_schreibt @Wolven that's exactly correct. I think alcoholism and drunk driving are bad, but I still drink alcohol.
I think the source of my confusion was that this thread seems to be critical of the effective altruism *movement* as it is embodied and championed by some very awful people with awful views, but not that the concept itself is inherently eugenic.
EDIT: or at least, no one has yet convinced me of that or linked to anything arguing it, but I'm all ears!
I think that eugenics only enter into it once you pervert your priorities to no longer count the right to life and wellbeing of all currently living people as equally important and to be willing to weigh off one person's suffering against another person's wellbeing.
Valuing one life more than another isn't inherent in effective altruism, as far as I understand it. Because then it's no longer altruism, it's social darwinism.
And capitalism... and so on and so forth.
@tine_schreibt @Wolven @rebeccawatson
What will maximize the happiness of humanity in the long term given the following facts:
@tine_schreibt @Wolven @rebeccawatson
Thanks! Here is a Google-free link to the same video: https://piped.video/watch?v=uO9kHkOKBUk
@Wolven the key is that central management of society is always destined to fail because of the unsolvable problem of managing the diversity of values in the population.
So in the end it doesn’t even matter whether the person proposing such a regime is a good person or a bad person, it’s not going to work, and it needs to be immediately rejected.
It’s only icing on that cake that people proposing to control others tend to be, well, not the greatest of people.
After all they are proposing supremacy of one form or another. Whether white supremacy or some other supremacy, well you’re already through that door.
I really don't understand how all those things become brainworms for people superficially like me (white, cis-male, hetero, ...).
I've met far too many people like me (in those superficial ways) who are less than mediocre (intellectually) and many people who aren't like me (in those superficial ways) who are smart/brilliant/creative.
I lament all the lost creative energy from those whose ideas get ignored in favour of brainworm ideas like these.
@virtuous_sloth @BrianWolven
I also have noticed that you never meet someone who is really into Nietzsche who thinks he himself is not one of the übermenschen.
"I totally think Nietzsche has it right. But I also realize that I'm a natural slave, so I'm just looking to serve the will of my betters.”
JennH
Dr. Damien P. Williams, Magus
amy tech (bones)
FediThing 
Veirling | #MMIWG #LandBack
Jenniferplusplus
Aviva Gary
lupus_blackfur
Thomas Beagle
Negative12DollarBill
Voline
Christine Schuhmann
Billy
Christian Pietsch (old acct.)
volkris
Bruce Elrick
Harish Narayanan
Edwin Young