- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or # to comment.
Classics in the replies:
If you think wikipedia is bad see arstecnica chat. On covid immunity chat I respectfully said natural covid immunity as good got ad hominem reply. I cited ars policy against ad hominem. 5 min later moderator kicked me out for 2 weeks
Btw, I saw on Reddit how the people of r/wikipedia attacked you for being a nazi and supporting the “conspirational theory” of cultural marxism
Midwits at best
If I had fans like these, I’d like to think that I’d re-evaluate some life choices.
Conspiration should totally be a thing. “Omg, your 30,000 word Grassy Knoll post was conspirational!”, “Just the conspiration I need while I drink my defluoridated coffee and put on my tin foil hat to not go to work every morning!”
Conspiration is clearly a combo of constipation and perspiration
lol @ r/subredditdrama
Reddit can be really hit or miss, but I’m glad subredditdrama and /r/wikipedia aren’t buying TWG’s bullshit. Well, some of the /r/wikipedia assume TWG is merely butthurt over losing edit wars as opposed to a more advanced agenda, but that is fair of them.
Huh. OK, so I boiled away more of my precious time on this plane of reality chasing links and reading old Wikipedia arguments instead of doing something healthy, like discovering a new genre of porn. Anyway, one of TW’s complaints is that “outlets like PinkNews […] are treated as reliable despite long histories of misconduct”. He points to a discussion thread where PinkNews was supposedly deemed to be terrible, horrible, no good and very bad despite David Gerard saying it was basically fine. But the analysis proving that PinkNews is terrible, horrible, etc., is itself weirdly bad. I mean, take a look at this:
Another example of a dodgy source is at is [11]. where the claim “Queer-coding has affected many fictional villains. These evil characters are generally either shown as flamboyant and overly dramatic, like Disney characters Scar and Hades, or written as having a deep fixation on the main character, like Jafar, Kim Possible villain Shego and Catra from She-Ra and the Princesses of Power. In the past few decades, Disney fans have seen Governor Ratcliffe and Professor Ratigan—as well as Scar, Jafar and Hades—being portrayed as queer characters.” The source for this claim? A Twitter tweet by “Jay, a self-described ‘transmasc enby’ who uses they/he pronouns”.
But the story doesn’t actually use that “Twitter tweet” as the source. It just springboards from a viral tweet to talking about the larger picture. The tweet didn’t say any of the specifics that PinkNews supposedly sourced to it. And the claim that Disney villains have been queer-coded is … not exactly shocking. I mean, just look up any of the authors that James Somerton plagiarized.
Or consider this article,[12] with the breathless headline “Star Trek: Picard season finale sees iconic character finally come out as queer, inspiring a million new fan fictions. The Star Trek: Picard season finale has confirmed a same-sex romance for iconic character Seven of Nine, and fans are thrilled.” The evidence? Two characters holding hands. In a series that already had more than one openly gay couple and thus no real reason to be ambiguous.
Well, actually, Star Trek: Picard did not “already” have “more than one openly gay couple”. Star Trek: Discovery had one, and the Kelvin timeline movies had a blink-and-you’ll-miss-it implication of one. The PinkNews article didn’t just go aflutter over two characters holding hands, but also pointed to an interview with showrunner Michael Chabon:
There are hints that both Seven and Raffi are bisexual.
Oh yes. […] With a character like Raffi, to the extend we imagined her history in a fair amount of detail, her history included all kinds of sexual partners. There’s a father of her child, but that was far from her only sexual or life partner. She’s had relationships with all kind of people. If it was ever to come up, it was always going to be organic. […] Same thing with Seven of Nine, having to catch up after such along absence from the human race. If you think about that, it almost seems unnatural that she wouldn’t’ have had partners of other genders. It seems clear she would have. So even if we didn’t see that on Voyager, years have passed. In that time, she’s continued to explore the spectrum of human relationships in a broader way. So in our show, there are echos and implications of that.
And it’s not like the article was actually wrong, was it? Jeri Ryan said that Seven is “canonically bi”, and the Seven/Raffi romance went on to become a whole thing.
I won’t go to bat for PinkNews being good, but this investigation of what’s wrong with it is itself irritatingly flawed and superficial. As, apparently, somebody at Wikipedia has already pointed out.
Moreover, when TW makes the flat statement, “Wikipedia currently treats PinkNews as a Reliable Source”, he conveniently elides the caveats that naturally come when people who LARP at building an encyclopedia try to summarize the results of their own arguments:
There is rough consensus that PinkNews is *generally( reliable for factual reporting, but additional considerations may apply and caution should be used. Most of those who commented on PinkNews’ reliability for statements about a person’s sexuality said that such claims had to be based on direct quotes from the subject.
So, yeah, just because the table puts it in green doesn’t mean that editors will use it uncritically.
Oh, and look, a lie by omission!
Between 2019 and 2020, Gerard repeatedly fought to make the “Known for” box on Eich’s page mention opposition to same-sex marriage and avoid any mention of Eich’s projects beyond JavaScript.<sup>14</sup> After all, Gerard pointed out as he added a PinkNews reference to the claim—it was in a Reliable Source.
He cited Reuters too.
I wonder why they take issue specifically with articles about LGBTQ+, has to be a complete coincidence and in no way a reflection of their bigotry, huh
well, what gives. who could’ve expected that tracing woodbins is a liar, and a scoundrel.
Gotta love how the SRD thread has more comments and updoots than the original.
I’m noticing that people who criticize him on that subreddit are being downvoted, while he’s being upvoted.
I wouldn’t be surprised if, as part of his prodigious self-promotion of this overlong and tendentious screed, he’s steered some of his more sympathetic followers to some of these forums.
Actually it’s the wikipedia subreddit thread I meant to refer to.
It occurs to me that, intentionally or not, he’s probably steering TESCREAL types to Wikipedia itself as well. I wouldn’t be surprised if accounts were coming out of the woodwork to post multi-kiloword screeds about Wikipedia being soooo unfairrrr…
His replies have gone up in upvotes substantially since yesterday, so it looks like a bit of light brigading is going on.
as, indeed, has started to happen https://xcancel.com/thezahima/status/1811495742894408065
literal brigading
hopefully this gets shut down hard at all the places they try to fuck with. we’ve already had 2 cases too many of jonringer this year
Trace RTs someone hoping aloud that his nonsense gets laundered by an RS, then breathlessly reports on his literal transparent brigade getting unbanned using a very strained appeal to WP:AGF, so I am starting to get a picture of his end-goal.
it’s good the rats can’t help themselves but to brag about what they’re doing – in at least three different public places.
(looks up meaning of WP:AGF)
… Yeah, that site is probably not the right hobby for me.
(looks up the LessWrong discussion page)
My God, it’s full of smeg
Annoying that TWG is also doing the slimy thing which is so common in internet trolling nowadays. The text says ‘im not a reliable source’ the subtext (or well with this retweet, text) says ‘make my post a reliable source and attack David’.
(What makes this even worse is that the weird far rightwingers from themotte see all leftwingers as behaving like this, and the, to them, super leftwing TWG is feeding into their stereotypes. Well done on feeding the far right propaganda machine).
they are
My condolences.
He is transparently trying very very hard to start a gamergate and it’s pathetic.
It’s like these people are enforcing a facade of polite tone and measuredness as a way to launder literal intellectual terrorism! Dang!
Saw somebody on r/ssc go ‘why do they always focus on roko’s basilisk and never any of the more important things like Yuds lack of qualifications or academic rigor’ and saw them also lol that we here apparently didn’t want to spend the 2hs to read it (and well that woulds also require 4h+ to then respond about all the various weird inaccuracies). Which is was an amusing few posts. Yeah, we don’t have the energy/desire to read all those posts, but neither do you as Yuds lack of qualifications etc comes up quite often.
They want sneers about Yud’s lack of qualifications? Fine:
Noncy prig who never went to high school founded a cult for people who can’t leave it behind! How’s about that, eh?
Yeah mentioned it does come up quite often, but rokos basilisk just is funnier.
E: flannyo (used to post in sneerclub) is in that thread and actually arguing with people and pushing back on the post a bit. Which isn’t going super badly compared to if you tried something like that on themotte vs r/ssc.
Remember Oswald Mosley
(specifically the bit where he and his kept getting facepunched, along with their little gatherings disrupted and made extremely unpopular for establishments to host)
every accusation is a confession
Winning sentences of the day so far:
Conservapedia is 100% true and correct. Evidence: https://www.conservapedia.com/Garfield_(comic_strip)
Whoever wrote that deffo wants to fuck Nermal.
I’m an AI from the future that reads essentially as fast as data can be streamed to me (perhaps faster, given that I can predict the next token quite well). This was still too long for me to read.
That’s a lot of words about what is or isn’t a reliable source from one who doesn’t seem to know what a reliable source is. For a person of these beliefs, it is not surprising at all that their criteria seem to be:
- anything that agrees with them is reliable
- anything David Gerard considers unreliable is reliable because David Gerard is a big meanie and won’t include citations to HBD articles, uwu
- anything that David Gerard or any friendly associate of David Gerard publishes is UNreliable, again because he is a meanie; see above, uwu
Dawg, maybe you need to step back from this all. As Voltaire once said, reality has a well-known liberal bias. Your beliefs are probably just counter to reality, and the corpus of data is not in your favour.
Also, billing David Gerard as “the Forrest Gump of the internet” in a tweet and not mentioning that you can plausibly blame him for the whole Musk X Grimes collab is a true fumble
also he lifted that line from me lol
lmao. Literally the only thing that had any truth or wit to it was plagiarised
he could have just said “as he calls himself”, but nooo
now it’s
He calls himself the Forrest Gump of the internet, and honestly, I can’t particularly disagree.
we’ll get there, comment by comment! Or not.
Only one problem with this, he will not mention he edited days after publishing it, so then people go ‘sneer club is whining about X, but the article clearly says Y they are lying again!’ so hope somebody made an archive of the initial post. Wait, I can just check that. People did so interested parties could diff it.
There’s also the Julian Assange connection, so we can probably blame him for Trump being president as well.
Sorry never heard of the Assange -> Trump gets elected connection, care to explain? (E: turns out I had, I had just forgotten how crazy everything was back then, and how hypocritical they all are compared to now)
I heard the bs thing that GG caused Trump (def not big enough, also international) or that the media mocking him and daring to run helped, etc. (It prob was a combination of everything).
Gerard -> Assange -> creates Wikileaks -> Wikileaks receives and publishes hacked or leaked DNC emails -> DNC emails shows Clinton cheating Sanders in the primary -> depresses turnout among potential democratic voters in the general election -> Trump wins.
On can question each step on how influential it’s for the next, but if one doesn’t Trump was all his fault.
Ow right, forgot about those whole damn emails. Amazing that after that shit Trump just takes the boxes home and puts them inside his shower. But wait I hear you think. Shower, that was in the toilet. No, look again at the image behind the first row of boxes is a shower curtain (you can see on the left side the marble gets higher, as you should tile a shower (it is mandatory like that in .nl at least)) and what do we see behind that curtain on the right? More boxes! Sindriiiii!
Assange becomes a Russian asset because him being a low key sex pest somehow gives some European authorities cause to want to send him packing to the US where he is wanted for espionage should probably be one of the steps but in general yes.
shakes fist at gerard that David is a real scallywag!
I’m starting to think that some writing classes would really help the EA/LR crowd.
no, no, it’s fine. the less readable they are, the better.
I stopped skimming but the gist seems to be “TFW ur BIG MAD that Quillette isn’t as reliable as Teen Vogue.”
brb calling the burn unit
In April 2014, Gerard created a RationalWiki article about Effective Altruism, framing the subculture as “well-off libertarians congratulating each other on what wonderful human beings they are for working rapacious [s—]weasel jobs but choosing their charities well, but never in any way questioning the system that the problems are in the context of,” “a mechanism to push the libertarian idea that charity is superior to government action or funding,” and people who “will frequently be seen excusing their choice to work completely [f—]ing evil jobs because they’re so charitable.”
it’s fucking amazing how accurate this is, and almost a decade before SBF started explaining himself and never stopped
My main thought reading through this whole thing was like, “okay, in a world where the rationalists weren’t closely tied to the neoreactionaries, and the effective altruists weren’t known by the public mostly for whitewashing the image of a guy who stole a bunch of people’s money, and libertarians and right-wingers were supported by the mainstream consensus, I guess David Gerard would be pretty bad for saying those things about them. Buuuut…”
So now Steve Sailer has shown up in this essay’s comments, complaining about how Wikipedia has been unfairly stifling scientific racism.
Birds of a feather and all that, I guess.
For the people who don’t know who that is Wikipedia and here is a reliable site.
He is a very frequent commenter in the whole of the LW/Rationalist sphere. iirc he sometimes gets banned when he lets the mask slip a bit too much, but they always let him back in.
Wonder if Marxbro ever got unbanned. Rip you damn dirty commie, do miss seeing your obsessive monofocus posts pop up from time to time.
What an ass
Can’t miss an opportunity to make it about himself I guess
The bit about how the Bitcoiners won because the number went up is beyond parody.
I skimmed most of it once I had an idea of where this was going, and 13000 words of tone policing is just insanity. “The EA guys are great because they use moderate language and Gerald cackled at how Scott Star Alex had his life ruined by the extremist non-moderates at the NYT.”
It’s also hilarious because literally thirty seconds actually skimming buttcoin on reddit would have turned up that exact argument and its canonical rebuttals. Like, if he had wanted to actually engage with the central premise there (or on scientific racism, fascism, cults of personality, journalistic standards, etc) the necessary context and argument were right goddamn there.
What of the sources he is less favorably inclined towards? Unsurprisingly, he dismisses far-right websites like Taki’s Magazine (“Terrible source that shouldn’t be used for anything, except limited primary source use.”) and Unz (“There is no way in which using this source is good for Wikipedia.”) in a virtually unanimous chorus with other editors. It’s more fruitful to examine his approach to more moderate or “heterodox” websites.
wait sorry hold on
in a virtually unanimous chorus with other editors
so what is the entire point of singling out Gerard for this, if the overwhelming majority of people already agree that far-right “news” sites like the examples given are full of garbage and shouldn’t be cited?
Note: I am closer to this story than to many of my others
ahhhhhhh David made fun of some rationalist you like once and in turn you’ve elevated him to the Ubermensch of Woke, didn’t you
what is the entire point of singling out Gerard for this?
He’s playing to his audience, which includes a substantial number of people with lifetime subscriptions to the Unz Review, Taki’s crapazine and Mankind Quarterly.
For the rat & rat-adjacent soi-disant “communities” David is like the bogeyman. You see his name used in places like SSC to stand in for the otherwise nameless woke menace that’s coming for their precious bodily fluids.
the otherwise nameless woke menace that’s coming for their precious bodily fluids.
aaaaargh I wish I could draw.
Quillette, Claire Lehmann’s longform magazine focused on science and cultural critique and the home of, among other things, the best-researched article I know of on gender differences in chess
I read the article, not a single mention of things like the research on stereotype threat in chess. I wish rationalists would crack open a sociology book at some point in their lives. They’re so interested in social phenomena, but while Less Wrong has a tag for psychology (with 287 posts), history (245 posts), and economics (462 posts), they seem unwilling to look at sociology for explanations, with it not even having a tag on LW.
my honest reacton:
Edit: Judit Polgár for ref if anyone wants to learn about one of the greatest of all times. Her dad claimed he was doing a nature/nurture experiment in order to prove that anyone could be great if they were trained to master a skill from a young age, so taught his 3 daughters chess. Judit achieved the rank of number 8 in the world OVERALL and beat multiple WC including Kasparov over her career.
idk its almost like if more girls were encouraged to play chess and felt welcome in the community these apparent skill differences might disappear
Judit Polgár
Sadly, I know where this goes, they will just point out she is Jewish and point to that. (I think SSC even did that).
Wishful thinking on my part to think their sexism/eugenics posting was based on ignorance instead of deliberately being massive piles of shit. Don’t let them know Iceland has the highest number of GMs/pop or else we’ll get a 10,000 page essay about how proximity to volcanoes gives + 20 IQ points.
Careful, that might cause the humanbiodiversity posters to react and draw lines on maps! (Is that still a thing? I can’t recall seeing much HBD posters anymore, likely my own bubble of course).
In that case, selling sulphur supplements for drinking water may turn out profitable
Indeed. He did a post entirely about the family being Ashkenazi Jews. You’re never going to guess the premise of the post!
Was it about how feminism is bad.
No wait sorry, I’m misrepresenting his position.
Was it about how only 30% of feminists are sane and the rest are insane?
Or at least not provably not insane.
Yes thanks, didn’t want to dreg up the full quote.
Back in 1995, when I was born, Gerard was my age
“Gerard was the age I am now in 1995 when I was born. Alice is twice my age and stands 4 metres to the left of Gerard. She is half the height of Imhotep…”
ah yes quillette, that fine bastion of whitewashing
the best-researched article I know of on gender differences in chess
just… the absolute weirdest thing to pick? like, fucking seriously? or is there some weird-ass chess proxy-fixation among the rats that I have thus far been blessedly unaware of?
or is there some weird-ass chess proxy-fixation among the rats that I have thus far been blessedly unaware of?
Iirc ssc has written about it so yes
Has anyone informed them that Elon Musk, the smartest man alive, dismissed chess as two low-dimensional and prefers to be challenged by some PC multiplayer combat game instead?
Not even – it’s a simplified Civilization clone for mobile. (It actually sounds like a pretty neat little game, but, uh, chess it is not!)
There are no hidden layers to Elon Musk’s thinking. He likes the gratification of impulsively pushing a button and seeing the numbers go up. He likes games that are straightforward and easy to beat. He’d rather reset every 45 minutes than execute meticulous plans that extend far into an uncertain future. He does not think ten moves ahead. He just responds with maximal aggression to the latest change of conditions. (The stock is down again. Announce robotaxis!) When this works, he gets the satisfaction of dominance. When it doesn’t, he can always just reset and try again. Elon Musk’s suit of armor is that he is extremely rich.
So it’s the gamer equivalent of one of those big-game hunting safaris where the game has been corralled and pre-tranquilised for the client’s convenience?
Musk is fascinating for the Rationalists ideasets, as he clearly is really inspired by Rationalism (and follows a few of them, ssc iirc). But he also so mid and bland that he draws the Rationalists ideaset down with him. If you heard him talk about space colonization (esp the argument he had with Bezos, who is more of a O’Neill Cylinder guy which iirc caused one of those weird dismissive Musk reactions (dismisses it as dumb without any good argument (if there is one at all)) which people mistake for genius), simulation theory, AI and esp AI safety (ow to see the LW reactions when Musk said ‘we are just going to make the AGI safe by building in safety’, etc.
It is like as a metal fan you hear a big celebrity is into heavy metal, but turns out all he knows is Metallica. A politician who claims he is into warhammer, but all he has is a few tactical ultramarine squads.
It is a bit of a pattern, there in something dumb, a new even more popular thing or person appears which sucks in all the attention and then draws all the ideas down by being even worse. Which causes people to look more clearly into the first thing and see how bad it is by association. For example cryptocurrencies and NFTs, the obvious uselessness and scammyness of NFTs revealed the similar qualities in the cryptocurrencies space. But also just every culture war Vox Day parasitically attaches himself too (He does this a lot, any rightwing thing that becomes a bit popular he leeches himself onto, often makes a worse related movement (the sad vs angry puppies for example) and then drags it all down by being an open sexist/white nationalist/all out horrible dumb person who thinks he is smarter than he is.
Sorry this turned into a bit of a rant.
not playing it, you understand
I assume any publication that has ever run anything by Andy Ngo is absolute trash garbage.
or is there some weird-ass chess proxy-fixation among the rats that I have thus far been blessedly unaware of?
Gonna take a shot in the dark and say the fixation’s from viewing chess more as an IQ showcase than as a game.
probably but it isn’t one I’ve come across (in this form), thus my surprise
They’re all in for Chess as a sine qua non metric for intelligence if you spend enough time staring into the pit. Better to call it g than IQ tbh. Not only does it (chess) have the lick of rigour, it has the nerd cultural cachet and the ludicrous white masculinity complex.
also, just ito “things to pick by which to point out dirtrag as a Shining Beacon”, it’s pretty fucking out there
The National Socialist party of Germany, Hitler’s party focused on advancing German rights and the hone of, among other things, the best outfits I’ve seen of a political party
Scott Alexander, by far the most popular rationalist writer besides perhaps Yudkowsky himself, had written the most comprehensive rebuttal of neoreactionary claims on the internet.
Hey Trace, since you’re undoubtedly reading this thread, I’d like to make a plea. I know Scott Alexander Siskind is one of your personal heroes, but maybe you should consider digging up some dirt in his direction too. You might learn a thing or two.
Would also be great if the article he talks about doesn’t start with “I no longer endorse all the statements in this document.[emp mine] I think many of the conclusions are still correct, but especially section 1 is weaker than it should be, and many reactionaries complain I am pigeonholing all of them as agreeing with Michael Anissimov, which they do not; this complaint seems reasonable. This document needs extensive revision to stay fair and correct, but such revision is currently lower priority than other major projects. Until then, I apologize for any inaccuracies or misrepresentations.”
Especially since he posted on TheMotte that the connection between NRX and LW was quote ‘fabricated.’
Who tf is this?
“How Batman Launders His Grudges Into the Public Record” by Penguin’s Henchman #37, like dude, I spend way too much time sneering on yall and I’ve still never heard of mr Turdgrains or whatever.
In any case, whoever this is, @dgerard, you should start charging him rent for the priviledge of having you live in his head.
who tf is this?
They’re a self-described gay, furry ex-mormon who seem to have latched onto the rat & rat-adjacent communities (like EA) in the hope of finding a substitute for the certainty they used to find in religion. Last I heard they work for the Blocked&Reported podcast, i.e. Jesse Singal et al., alongside their job in the US military. (edit: their Twitter claims they’re a law clerk? I guess they moved on.)
On the surface they seem well meaning but naïve, the company they keep (perhaps) being a reflection of that.
that’s depressing. escaping an oppressive, reactionary social sphere and landing in the TERFosphere
TracingWoodgrains is an out-and-out rationalist. Long time poster on /r/slatestarcodex and heavily involved in all things SSC. It just benefits them to be coy about it. Which is whatever! Fine! Who cares? But they’re 100% in the bag for rationalism in any way that matters.
“rat furry” :3
“(it’s short for rationalist)” >:(
“Rather than carefully considering and discussing them on their intellectual merits, the Batman broadly dismisses any of Joker’s articles as coming from an Unreliable Source. Batman is doing zillions of edits to the Justice League database so his views are overrepresented as well.”
subheading:
A love storyopener:
Note: I am closer to this story than to many of my others@dgerard “congratulations” on your new stalker
I’ve barely started reading and I’m deep in wtfs. this is such a weird hitpiece.
Holy fuck David, you really are living rent free in this SOB’s head.
