1attice

Thanks for pointing it out, dang. But if dark absurdism isn't permitted in 2026, I clearly have no mouth for the scream.

[flagged]

Yes, probably. Americans love this stuff

Devil take them all.

Iceweasel

[flagged]

How brave to call out Big Mural on HN! Ha, take that! Go woke, go broke! /s

I nod along with Howey here on every point save one. Namely, it is simply false that the apocalyptic narratives are full-cloth marketing products that are cynically engineered and used.

For better or worse, the hold that Yudkowski-flavoured big-R Rationalism holds over us all is significant. Academics (like Cal Newport) seem committed to belittling it as a sort of cult-sex-flavoured philosophy fan fic, and writers (Zitron, Howey, Doctorow) seem equally committed to a cui-bueno wake-up-sheeple take.

But my position is: no matter how florid the polycule, or naive the argumental ligaments, or potentially lucrative the bezzle, it is still worthwhile taking the stated intellectual commitments of the people making the tech.

Take people seriously. And, unless you really, really, really know for certain that they are operating in bad faith, you are to regard yourself as stuck with their putative sincerity.

This is the "principle of charity" familiar from undergrad philosophy classes, and it is an epistemic moral value worth holding onto in 2026.

With all due respect, this example is obsolete anecdata. I doubt the cruise ship was using Astra, for example, or Fable. Or really anything past GPT 3

Interesting. Yet as someone approaching the first of those two last numbers, I would say that that isn't very old at all

Google the man.

Citation required