fubarobfusco comments on New censorship: against hypothetical violence against identifiable people - Less Wrong

22 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 23 December 2012 09:00PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (457)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 24 December 2012 02:44:30AM 8 points [-]

It has a net negative effect because people then go around saying (this post will be deleted after policy implementation), "Oh, look, LW is encouraging people to commit suicide and donate the money to them." That is what actually happens. It is the only real significant consequence.

Now it's true that, in general, any particular post may have only a small effect in this direction, because, for example, idiots repeatedly make up crap about how SIAI's ideas should encourage violence against AI researchers, even though none of us have ever raised it even as a hypothetical, and so themselves become the ones who conceptually promote violence. But it would be nice to have a nice clear policy in place we can point to and say, "An issue like this would not be discussable on LW because we think that talking about violence against individuals can conceptually promote such violence, even in the form of hypotheticals, and that any such individuals would justly have a right to complain. We of course assume that you will continue to discuss violence against AI researchers on your own blog, since you care more about making us look bad and posturing your concern, than about the fact that you, yourself, are the one has actually invented, introduced, talked about, and given publicity to, the idea of violence against AI researchers. But everyone else should be advised that any such 'hypothetical' would have been deleted from LW in accordance with our anti-discussing-hypothetical-violence-against-identifiable-actual-people policy."

Comment author: fubarobfusco 24 December 2012 07:19:01PM 9 points [-]

idiots repeatedly make up crap

Idiots make up crap. You probably can't change this. The more significant you are, the more crap idiots will make up about you. Idiots claim that Barack Obama is a Kenyan Muslim terrorist and that George Bush is mentally subnormal. Not because they have sufficient evidence of these propositions, but because gossip about Obama and Bush is thereby juicier than gossip about my neighbor Marty whom you've never heard of.

Idiots make up crap about projects, too. They say NASA faked the moon landing, vaccines cause autism, and that international food aid contains sterility drugs. It turns out that scurrilous rumors about NASA and the United Nations spread farther than scurrilous rumors about that funny-looking building in the town park which is totally a secret drug lab for the mayor.

But everyone else should be advised that any such 'hypothetical' would have been deleted from LW in accordance with our anti-discussing-hypothetical-violence-against-identifiable-actual-people policy."

How about treating the hypothetical as the stupidity it is? "Dude, beating up AI researchers wouldn't work and you're a jerk for posting it. There are a half dozen obvious reasons it wouldn't work, if you take five minutes to think about it ... and you're a jerk for posting it because it's stirring up shit for no good reason. Seriously, quit it. This is LW, not Conspiracy Hotline."

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 24 December 2012 08:08:16PM *  8 points [-]

There are a half dozen obvious reasons it wouldn't work, if you take five minutes to think about it

And yet, when attempting to list them, the only one anyone from SIAI can seem think of is bad PR.

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 24 December 2012 07:41:58PM 2 points [-]

Seriously, quit it. This is LW, not Conspiracy Hotline.

Sounds like a fine reply on LW. I think it will be useful, on forums not LW, to have a LW-policy to point to.

Comment author: Viliam_Bur 25 December 2012 11:14:24PM 1 point [-]

Idiots claim that Barack Obama is a Kenyan Muslim terrorist and that George Bush is mentally subnormal.

The important difference is that in these cases the given idiot is less famous than the person they make crap about.

Imagine an alternative universe where Barack Obama is just an unknown guy, and some idiots for whatever reason start claiming that he is a Muslim terrorist. I can imagine an anonymous phone call to the police, a police action with some misunderstanding, resulting with too many negative utilons for Mr. Obama.

In our universe, Mr. Obama has the advantage of being more famous than any such possible accuser. However, SIAI does not have the same advantage.