undefined | Better HN

0 pointsthrowaway274482mo ago0 comments

Obviously, ineffective action will be counterproductive. I recommend effective action.

0 comments

5 comments · 1 top-level

handoflixue2mo ago· 4 in thread

That's exactly the point every prominent member of the "Doomer" community is making: Violence isn't an effective action; it is a counterproductive action. It is actively destructive.

NoGravitas2mo ago

Lenin called this kind of individualistic, unorganized violence "revolutionary adventurism", and strongly condemned it. The lesson is not that violence isn't effective, it's that unorganized violence isn't effective. Sufficiently organized violence can be very effective indeed.

That said, the same is true of nonviolence.

throwaway27448OP2mo ago

Well what other tools do we have? Waiting for the market to fix things is also destructive and harms orders of magnitude more people than violent direct action does; democracy is wildly ineffective compared to violence even at its most optimistic; what else remains? Fleeing the planet?

handoflixue2mo ago

Giving this a less glib response: https://x.com/ESYudkowsky/article/2043601524815716866 goes in to some detail, but Eliezer has always had a fairly clear call for action, which is international regulation. And in particular, he makes the point that random acts of violence are actively counterproductive to his goal.

We walked out of the Cold War alive. Humanity has faced extinction before, and despite it all, we walked away alive last time. It's not unreasonable to think we can do it again.

handoflixue2mo ago

> Well what other tools do we have?

I'll answer with a quote from the founder of the Rationalist movement, Eliezer:

"How certain do you have to be that your child has terminal cancer, before you start killing puppies? 10% sure? 50% sure? 99.9%? The answer is that it doesn't matter how certain you are, killing puppies doesn't cure cancer."

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

5 comments · 1 top-level

handoflixue2mo ago· 4 in thread

That's exactly the point every prominent member of the "Doomer" community is making: Violence isn't an effective action; it is a counterproductive action. It is actively destructive.

NoGravitas2mo ago

Lenin called this kind of individualistic, unorganized violence "revolutionary adventurism", and strongly condemned it. The lesson is not that violence isn't effective, it's that unorganized violence isn't effective. Sufficiently organized violence can be very effective indeed.

That said, the same is true of nonviolence.

throwaway27448OP2mo ago

Well what other tools do we have? Waiting for the market to fix things is also destructive and harms orders of magnitude more people than violent direct action does; democracy is wildly ineffective compared to violence even at its most optimistic; what else remains? Fleeing the planet?

handoflixue2mo ago

Giving this a less glib response: https://x.com/ESYudkowsky/article/2043601524815716866 goes in to some detail, but Eliezer has always had a fairly clear call for action, which is international regulation. And in particular, he makes the point that random acts of violence are actively counterproductive to his goal.

We walked out of the Cold War alive. Humanity has faced extinction before, and despite it all, we walked away alive last time. It's not unreasonable to think we can do it again.

handoflixue2mo ago

> Well what other tools do we have?

I'll answer with a quote from the founder of the Rationalist movement, Eliezer:

"How certain do you have to be that your child has terminal cancer, before you start killing puppies? 10% sure? 50% sure? 99.9%? The answer is that it doesn't matter how certain you are, killing puppies doesn't cure cancer."

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse