Yeah, this is the first time I’ve commented on lesswrong in months and I would prefer to just be out of here. But OP was such nasty meangirl bullying that, when someone showed it to me, I wanted to push back.

Come on, William. "But they said their criticism of this person's reputation wasn't personal" is not good enough. It's like calling to "no take backs" or something. 

I have a history in animal activism (both EA and mainstream) and I think PETA has been massively positive by pushing the Overton window. People think PETA isn't working bc they feel angry at PETA when they feel judged or accused, but they update on how it's okay to treat animals, and that's the point. More moderate groups like the Humane Society get the credit, but it takes an ecosystem. You don't have to be popular and well-liked to push the Overton window. You also don't have to be a group that people want to identify with. 

But I don't think PETA's an accurate comparison for Kat. It seems like you're comparing Kat and PETA bc you would be embarrassed to be implicated by both, not bc they have the same tactics or extremity of message. And then the claim that other people will be turned off or misinformed becomes a virtuous pretext to get them and their ideas away from your social group and identity. But you haven't open-mindedly tried to discover what's good for the cause. You're just using your kneejerk reaction to justify imposing your preferences.

There's a missing mood here-- you're not interested in learning if Kat's strategy is effective at AI Safety. You're just asserting that what you like would be the best for saving everyone's lives too and don't really seem concerned about getting the right answer to the larger question.

Again, I have contempt for treating moral issues like a matter of ingroup coolness. This is the banality of evil as far as I'm concerned. It's natural for humans but you can do better. The LessWrong community is supposed to help people not to do this but they aren't honest with themselves about what they get out of AI Safety, which is something very similar to what you've expressed in this post (gatekept community, feeling smart, a techno-utopian aesthetic) instead of trying to discover in an open-minded way what's actually the right approach to help the world. 

Yeah actually the employees of Lightcone have led the charge in trying to tear down Kat. Its you who has the better standards, Maxwell, not this site.

Getting a strong current of “being smart and having interesting and current tastes is more important than trying to combat AI Danger, and I want all my online spaces to reflect this” from this. You even seem upset that Kat is contaminating subreddits that used to not be about Safety with Safety content… Like you’re mad about progress in embrace of AI Safety. You critique her for making millennial memes as if millennials don’t exist anymore (lesswrong is millennial and older) and content should only be for you.

You seem kinda self-aware of this at one point, but doesn’t that seem really petty and selfish of you?

I appreciate how upfront you are here, bc a lot of people who feel the same way disguise it behind moralistic or technical arguments. And your clarity should make it easier for you to get over yourself and come to your senses.

Meritorious!

The bill is in danger of not passing Appropriations because of lobbying and misinformation. That's what calling helps address. Calling does not make SB 1047 cheaper, and therefore does not address the Suspense File aspects of what it's doing in Appropriations. 

Why is "dishonesty" your choice of words here? Our mistake cut against our goal of getting people to call at an impactful time. It wasn't manipulative. It was merely mistaken. I understand holding sloppiness against us but not "dishonesty". 

I think the lack of charity is probably related to "activism dumb".

It was corrected.