[pfdietz]

It's proper to suspect arguments that are motivated by self-interest. The stronger that self-interest, the more one should suspect the argument. This is what you're saying?

In that case, the anti-AI Luddite arguments are maximally impeached, since they are motivated by fear of personal disaster. Tao doesn't need AI to succeed; the Luddites desperately need it to fail. So they are willing to say anything, jumping right to ad hominem arguments when they lack any real substantive rebuttal.

[keybored]

The billionaires shall inherit the Earth, for they are minimally of want and need, only merely aspiring for more accumulation of wealth as a sport.

[pfdietz]

Or, we can judge what they say by the merits rather than hypocritically applying ad hominem arguments to them and not to others.

[keybored]

It’s not an ad hominem.