[kelseyfrog]

Ah yes, "continue losing."

Go ahead and read Gilens and Page and tell me participatory democracy is working. Until then, expect more of the same impotent condemnations and a refusal to understand the social mechanics producing acts of violence.

[arduanika]

I am aware of their arguments, yes, but what I'm objecting to is that you're bringing this irrelevant hobbyhorse into a discussion of a truly fringe ideology. We're not talking about a classic G&P-style issue where the voters and the elites disagree. Nobody cares for the AI doomers -- not elites, not voters, nobody.

When you talk about "participatory democracy" in a thread like this, you are enabling them in their delusion that people do care. The AI safetyist think tanks put out these pushpolls trying to convince themselves that voters care about AI doom. They seal up the walls of their echo chamber, and they believe themselves to be heroes. Then one day, one of them throws a Molotov, and nobody is surprised.

[kelseyfrog]

> Nobody cares for the AI doomers

Which is precisely why they've resorted to violence.

We can do better than denigrating positions as "hobbyhorse." HN deserves better than that.

[arduanika]

Fair enough. Retry: What I'm objecting to is your brilliant, insightful point, to which you are attached enough that you've injected it into this thread where it is, by your own admission, irrelevant. They're resorting to violence because they're unpopular, not because democracy failed to do its job here.

[kelseyfrog]

My dear friend, this is a discussion board where people share their takes. It's simply a take.

We can attempt to deduce the root cause, but please don't assume we're on different epistemic footing. It's speculation and that's fine.