|
epitome of incomprehensibility
|
Someone I know linked one of this guy's Substack articles, and it impressed me, so I read another.
I don't think I heard of him before this, but there's a knack to writing entertaining longish articles, and he has it.
The weirder thing is, I think I engaged more with the one whose tone I didn't like as much. (I thought he was needlessly snotty towards other writers at times.) Maybe because the second one I read is less serious overall, which allows some insults to be written off as jokes. Maybe because disagreement fires off more brain cells than agreement does. (I don't know here. But I've been told it takes more muscles to frown than smile, which must indicate that frowning is better exercise! Frown more, people!!)
...Anyway, in the first one I read, he writes how it's morally suspect to justify Hamas' crimes on Oct. 7, 2023 (it was written shortly after that) by invoking worse or continuing Israeli ones - not that it's bad to point out the former, longer oppression, but that excusing violence is unfair and ultimately the way Israeli pro-war hardliners think. The only thing I would add to this, maybe, is my "anarcho_pacifist" line that countries are all sort of made up anyway, so maybe we shouldn't kill each other over them.
So here's that one: https://samkriss.substack.com/p/but-not-like-this
But about the killing bit - AS a bit - here's the one where he threatens to murder people who let AI do their writing for them: https://samkriss.substack.com/p/if-you-let-ai-do-your-writing-i-will
I mean, I agree with a lot of this too (assuming the threat is comedy), down to the specifics of not minding AI solving math problems (my mind: "oh cool!") but objecting to them generating writing, especially since it's everywhere (stay in your lane, you dumbly summarizing plagiarists!) Why? I don't know.
But there's a specific thing I'm puzzling out of this article: ai_and_vague_metaphors. I'll put more there.
|
261027
|
