announcing ILÚVATAR, my multi-billion dollar company which will specialize in the dismantling of all other idiotically tolkien-named entities, that they shalt see that no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me, nor can any alter the music in my despite

The only other competitor is the site that shall not be named

It doesn't change the fact that Christianity is a hegemonic faith. We're talking about the reaction in Western, European and/or English-speaking audiences.

It's perfectly ok. It's also hypocritical to get ESPECIALLY angry that someone from a historically smaller (and oppressed, often directly by YOUR religious tradition) dared to defile YOUR religious hegemonic symbols above and beyond a generalized distaste for sectarian acts of defilement.

That is CERTAINLY A Way to look at asking people to examine whether they have an especially hostile response to Jewish misconduct against hegemonic faiths.

Sure, and I'm expecting people to expect better of themselves than internalizing "well, Christianity is a REAL religion, so how DARE?"

No shit. That's not what I'm asking.

What I'm asking is "are you, as a Christian, getting especially mad that mere Jews dare to disrespect Big J?"

They did.

I mean, a sentiment like that is to some degree a luxury of actually having an intact state. it's like how American leftists howl "Death to Amerikkka!" because they know it won't happen.

I think if you live in the US, it is like... beyond belief that countries can and do turn off the internet regularly.

When I was in Leh, India just turned off the internet to a region of 1.5 million people for no discernible reason and when I asked the locals were like "yeah that happens"

I think it's pretty clear in the scene that each knows who the other is.

I don't think it's meant to be anti-Israel. I think it's meant to be "this is a morally scarring task and conflict that can use people up even when they think themselves righteous."

("Validity" here, to be clear, does not necessarily include "things w/o ethical challenges." but like "this can analyze/churn out good-enough content for a first pass" *is a "valid" use case, as in there is a real demand there, as opposed to "AI will institute Godbot & let you fire everyone.")

Absolutely, and SV has always had a lot of problems with this.

ironically this has also been imo a case where you've got "valid" (as in, there is a conceivable technological/craft/hobby niche) uses for AI, there's a bunch of SCAMS and different groups' distaste for each merges into a blob of animus

Sure but at the same time it also indicates that people are increasingly using it, so I don't think they're mutually exclusive.

ultimately the distrust of AI companies is part and parcel of a broader (and justified) skepticism towards upper management in an increasingly low-trust society, imo.

I think that entirely depends on your interests and what you want to be doing.

This is reducing it to an absurdity, I'm specifically talking about the targeted effort to murder members of the Jewish community as an act of religious violence.

I'm talking about murders *of* members of that community, to be clear.

That depends on the marketing, I suppose. There's plenty of simple "this will help you, the user!" stuff, and it's had a fair bit of success as exhibited by how many people keep using it. If anything the problem for boosters is the VC-focused marketing has broken containment.

I mean, they absolutely did? There's a HUGE amount of consumer-focused AI marketing praising its capabilities as an aide, etc. it's just that we're seeing the stuff they also aimed at managers and VCs, which more overtly exposes the big tech priorities of catering to investors?

Nobody said it was, and yet, people's reactions are uneven, in ways I think are worth examination.

what's mostly happened, I would argue, is that the stuff intended for managers and VCs has escaped containment, maybe because more and more people see themselves as entrepreneurs.

There's still no shortage of that aimed at *consumers*, the thing is that these days what gets picked up here is the stuff clearly intended for the VCs and investors.

One element of privilege is that your Imagined Slights are treated as Real Harms and the other's Real Harms are dismissed as Imagined Slights.

I just kind of think it's got vastly outsized attention while people simultaneously try to obscure the reactionary attitudes of not only other bosses but other industries.

like if we're talking Who Needs to Pay, the American media is WAY ahead of tech as an industry.

People railing about how much they hate tech should probably be comparing our voting records and typical attitudes to those of other industries before they start railing about how tech & all tech workers are out to destroy society.

I mean this is Palantir, they're an insane outlier in the tech industry that employs a grand total of less than 4400 people.

i don't think it's a spicy take to say that if you expect jewish communities to sever any physical or emotional connection to israel to prove their loyalty to your country then your views simply are definitionally incompatible with the existence of jewish communities as such

I hate this

But it's worth *asking* oneself about these things, just as it's obviously worth asking yourself as a Jew if you're putting *special* outsized weight on Israeli lives above Palestinian ones above normal amounts of coreligionist/community concern.