[stavros]

Are calls for violence bad when you're calling for throwing a molotov cocktail at a child? At an adult? At a serial killer? At someone who's about to shoot you unprovoked? At someone who murdered your family? At someone who's about to?

If you said "yes" to all of the above, I'd love to know your reasoning.

[empthought]

Yes.

If you want a molotov cocktail thrown so badly, throw it yourself. Don't put it on other people to do it for you.

[stavros]

Are the two choices "accept that violence is unconditionally bad" and "throw a molotov cocktail at Sam Altman's house"? Because that dichotomy seems a bit... false?

[empthought]

Your question was about calling for violence.

[lostlogin]

The general tone here is that freedom of speech is absolute and nothing should curtail that.

Not my personal view.

[what]

I’d like to know your reasoning for answering “no” to all of the above.

[stavros]

I guess we'll just have to find someone who answers no to all of that and ask them!

[what]

I think my point was obvious. What is your justification for answering no to any of them?

[stavros]

Alright, I'll explain. I don't think violence is bad against someone who's about to kill my family, because:

* I care about my family more than I care about a stranger.

* I care about people who don't kill people unprovoked more than I care about people who kill people unprovoked.

* My family are more than one person, versus the one killer.

That's why I answer no to that one.

[what]

Sure, I care about certain people more than others and I’d be willing to use violence to defend myself or my family. But that’s not the same as cheering on or advocating for an attack on someone else that may or may not have done something to harm someone totally unrelated to you.

[stavros]

It gets much more complicated when the person being harmed is someone who made and sold AI targeting systems that might be used against my country.