I’m Twitter mutuals with some of these e/acc people. I think that its founders and most (if not all) of its proponents are organic accounts, but it still might be a good idea to not signal-boost them.
What makes you think that? Where do you think this is coming from? It seems to have arrived too quickly (well on to my radar at least) to be organic IMO, unless there is some real-world community involved, which there doesn’t seem to be?
If you are interested in more content on e/acc, check out recent posts by Bayeslord and the original post by Swarthy, or follow anyofus on Twitter as we often host Twitter spaces discussing these ideas.
Neither the original post nor @bayeslord seem to exist anymore (I found this was also the case for another account named something like “Bitalik Vuterin” or something...) Seems fishy. I suspect at least that someone “e/acc” is trying to look like more people than they are. Not sure what the base rate for this sort of stuff is, though.
Much of why my priors say that the e/acc thing is organic is just my gestalt impression of being on Twitter while it was happening. Unfortunately, that’s not a legible source of evidence to people-who-aren’t-me. I’ll tell you what information I do remember, though:
“Bitalik Vuterin” does not ring a bell, I don’t think he was a very consequential figure to begin with.
@BasedBeffJezos claims to be the same person as @BasedBeff, and claims that he was locked out of his @BasedBeff account on 2022-08-08 due to “misinformation”, which he attributes to “blue checkmarks and scared EAs”.
I’m only like 85% certain about this claim, but I think @bayeslord made an “I quit” thread where he claimed that he was actually kinda sympathetic to EA all along, and e/acc was more of a joke, or maybe that it was actually meant to strengthen EA by red-teaming it. I’m even less certain about this next claim (~55%), but I think he mentioned getting an overwhelming amount of DMs from EAs trying to debate him.
I suspect e/acc is some sort of sock puppet op / astroturfing or something, and I’ve been trying to avoid signal boosting them.
I’m Twitter mutuals with some of these e/acc people. I think that its founders and most (if not all) of its proponents are organic accounts, but it still might be a good idea to not signal-boost them.
What makes you think that? Where do you think this is coming from? It seems to have arrived too quickly (well on to my radar at least) to be organic IMO, unless there is some real-world community involved, which there doesn’t seem to be?
Here’s a thing: https://beff.substack.com/p/notes-on-eacc-principles-and-tenets
Neither the original post nor @bayeslord seem to exist anymore (I found this was also the case for another account named something like “Bitalik Vuterin” or something...) Seems fishy. I suspect at least that someone “e/acc” is trying to look like more people than they are. Not sure what the base rate for this sort of stuff is, though.
Much of why my priors say that the e/acc thing is organic is just my gestalt impression of being on Twitter while it was happening. Unfortunately, that’s not a legible source of evidence to people-who-aren’t-me. I’ll tell you what information I do remember, though:
“Bitalik Vuterin” does not ring a bell, I don’t think he was a very consequential figure to begin with.
@BasedBeffJezos claims to be the same person as @BasedBeff, and claims that he was locked out of his @BasedBeff account on 2022-08-08 due to “misinformation”, which he attributes to “blue checkmarks and scared EAs”.
I’m only like 85% certain about this claim, but I think @bayeslord made an “I quit” thread where he claimed that he was actually kinda sympathetic to EA all along, and e/acc was more of a joke, or maybe that it was actually meant to strengthen EA by red-teaming it. I’m even less certain about this next claim (~55%), but I think he mentioned getting an overwhelming amount of DMs from EAs trying to debate him.
I think it was something else like that, not that.