91
Are EA billionaire philanthropists actually effective in their 'altruism'? (spoilers: no)
(bobjacobs.substack.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 13 Jul 2025
91 points (100.0% liked)
SneerClub
1155 readers
14 users here now
Hurling ordure at the TREACLES, especially those closely related to LessWrong.
AI-Industrial-Complex grift is fine as long as it sufficiently relates to the AI doom from the TREACLES. (Though TechTakes may be more suitable.)
This is sneer club, not debate club. Unless it's amusing debate.
[Especially don't debate the race scientists, if any sneak in - we ban and delete them as unsuitable for the server.]
See our twin at Reddit
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
They're no better than their Russian/American/Chinese billionaire equivalents; they just find themselves restricted by higher standards in Europe.
Make no mistake, if it weren't for the laws currently in place, European billionaires would be making the exact same moves those in America currently are.
The saying "there is no such thing as an ethical billionaire" springs to mind. Who did they, or their families fuck over, in order to garner that sort of wealth?
Anyone who was truly altruistic, and had that sort of money, would not retain their status of billionaire for very long.
There’s a running joke/working theory I’ve heard that in order to become billionaire, you have to have killed someone. (The reality is almost definitely worse)
The billionaire initiation ritual is that scene from Kingsman where
spoiler for a 11yo movie I guess
they ask him to kill his dog but instead of a dog it's a literal child that was performing forced labour for the last year and just wants to go home to its parents, and the bullets are very much livethe passing criteria:
They only pass if they go out of their way to kill a dog anyway.