• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    163 months ago

    He and his other cronies declared their plan was to accumulate a tonne of money and give it all away to charities. They called it effective altruism which we now know was total BS

    • Tar_Alcaran
      link
      fedilink
      English
      23 months ago

      “Well, I get to be a huge fucking asshole all I want, because if I, at some point in the future, spend all my money building the AI supergod it will save all of potential humanity, doing more good than anything ever before!”

      “But, can’t you do that AND feed hungry babies?”

      “No, the AI supergod requires a second golden airplane!”

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -23 months ago

      Well, a bunch of ernest and thoughtful philosophers called it effective altruism (see Toby Ord, will mccaskill, Peter singer). Then it was adopted by the deluded arrogant tech/finance bros and yeah yikes. Sucks to be a philosopher I guess. Someone uses your ideas fraudulently and boom, they’re your problem.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        33 months ago

        Anyone that spends more time philosophizing about doing good than doing good isn’t worth listening to.

        Peter Singer, btw, Mr Effective Altruism himself, wanted to genocide disabled infants. Not abort them as fetuses. Infanticide them.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -13 months ago

          If you think ideas can’t do good, then it sounds like you haven’t spent much time listening to anyone. Obviously if you’d considered it even cursorily you’d recognise that we need philosophy/politics/law to get beyond “sky man says bad” levels of ethics and morality in society.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -13 months ago

            Your opinion is irrelevant, you didn’t even detect the difference between no thought at all and the criticism of thinking about doing good more than doing good.