Want to wade into the snowy surf of the abyss? Have a sneer percolating in your system but not enough time/energy to make a whole post about it? Go forth and be mid.
Welcome to the Stubsack, your first port of call for learning fresh Awful you’ll near-instantly regret.
Any awful.systems sub may be subsneered in this subthread, techtakes or no.
If your sneer seems higher quality than you thought, feel free to cut’n’paste it into its own post — there’s no quota for posting and the bar really isn’t that high.
The post Xitter web has spawned so many “esoteric” right wing freaks, but there’s no appropriate sneer-space for them. I’m talking redscare-ish, reality challenged “culture critics” who write about everything but understand nothing. I’m talking about reply-guys who make the same 6 tweets about the same 3 subjects. They’re inescapable at this point, yet I don’t see them mocked (as much as they should be)
Like, there was one dude a while back who insisted that women couldn’t be surgeons because they didn’t believe in the moon or in stars? I think each and every one of these guys is uniquely fucked up and if I can’t escape them, I would love to sneer at them.
(Credit and/or blame to David Gerard for starting this.)
OT: an interesting musing I found on fedi:
Anybody else having problems with archive.is and its variants? I keep getting into an infinite captcha loop. I already tried making it an dns over https exception in firefox, which worked once.
E: tried a different browser, and same problem. Same on phone, it does work going from wifi to mobile however.
E2: I seem to have fixed it, by oddly rebooting my router. Which makes no sense to me.
That specific instance of Archive Today seems to have been taken over by activists who edit their copies of some pages and performed a DDOS attack (although all I know comes from social media posts and news stories). https://www.avclub.com/archiveis-under-fbi-investigation
Aren’t they all ran by the same people? To be clear I also tried some of the archive variants.
They are indeed all run by the same people.
A hackernews notices that HN autoflags 404 Media articles. A little downthread, dang bullshits unconvincingly in reponse.
If this is the real reason:
It’s because, for a long time, most of their content was behind a signup wall with no obvious workaround. I don’t know if it still is or not. If it isn’t, we can change it.
It is baffling that this isn’t communicated upfront to the users. Really weird move orange site.
Do they also block NYT, WSJ, Atlantic? I think not. Odd, but I didn’t trust dang and friends to start with. HN is not intended to be a neutral forum.
Wew, Cory Doctorow sure is posting through it
https://pluralistic.net/2026/03/12/normal-technology/#bubble-exceptionalism
Kind of wild that the guy who popularized “enshittification” as a term will die on the hill that the technology which drives the industrial enshittification of all human media is fine actually, because some people find the plugins useful.
Take “Morgellons Disease,” a psychosomatic belief that you have wires growing in your body, which causes sufferers to pick at their skin to the point of creating suppurating wounds. Morgellons emerged in the 2000s, but the name refers to a 17th-century case-report of a patient who suffered from a similar delusion:
Nitpick but this is unusually sloppy for Doctorow. 1) People with Morgellon’s don’t believe they have wires growing out of sores, but fibres (which upon examination turn out to be cotton for clothes). 2) The original Morgellons is a putative children’s disease «wherein they critically break out with harsh Hairs on their Backs, which takes off the Unquiet Symptomes of the Disease, and delivers them from Coughs and Convulsions.» Which is quite different from the modern condition, whose sufferers have skin sores anywhere in the body with fibrous material looking like lint, dandelion fluff etc., and not particularly associated with convulsions. And 3) The association between the two was made by Miriam Leitao, a mother who believes her son suffers from the disease, and has gone to countless doctors and media trying to prove it’s real. So it’s an attempt to legitimise the postulated disease by cherry-picking something “historical” that vaguely resembles it.
He knows how LLMs work, right? This really is just cope because he got called out for being weird about using them. Really fucking disappointing
In the original post he kept referring to Ollama like it was an LLM instead of a server app that hosts LLMs so I’d say the jury’s out on that.
edit: Also, throughout this piece he keeps equivocating between local LLMs and their behemoth online counterparts with their heavily proprietary tooling that occasionally wraps them into a somewhat useful product.
I think he assumes that because he can load up a modest speech-to-text model locally and casually transcribe several hours of video resources in somewhat short order (this was apparently his major formative experience with modern AI) it works the same with e.g. coding.
Like, hey gpt-oss please make sense of these ten thousand lines of context without access to a hundred bespoke MCP intermediaries and one or three functioning RAG systems as I watch the token generation rate slow to a trickle while the context window gradually fills up.
piece he keeps equivocating between local LLMs and their behemoth online counterparts with their heavily proprietary tooling that occasionally wraps them into a somewhat useful product.
This is fundamental to his approach. He believes that technology is inherently liberatory as long as it’s in the hands of the consumer.
They’re not vibe-coding mission-critical AWS modules.
and
- It’s worse than that, they’re vibe coding critical operating system components
It is nuts to deny the experiences these people are having. They’re not vibe-coding mission-critical AWS modules. They’re not generating tech debt at scale:
https://pluralistic.net/2026/01/06/1000x-liability/#graceful-failure-modes
They’re just adding another automation tool to a highly automated practice, and using it when it makes sense. Perhaps they won’t always choose wisely, but that’s normal too. There’s plenty of ways that pre-AI automation tools for software development led programmers astray. A skilled, centaur-configured programmer learns from experience which automation tools they should trust, and under which circumstances, and guides themselves accordingly.
Wow, the whole thing is indefensibly capital-W wrong, just an utterly weird rose-tinted view of the current corporate experience.
centaur-configured programmer
Cory, baby, my dogg, sure “enshittification” was a big hit, but you can’t expect that your rough-draft followups are automatically gold
A skilled, centaur-configured programmer
This is like reading Yud mumbling about “Shoggoths”. It’s giving knight errant, organ-meat eater, Byronic hero, Haplogroup Rlb.
Man, due to a weird alignment of the spheres I started reading those Honor Levy excerpts in the voice of Max Payne-style hardboiled narration and it fits weirdly well? Like a bargain version of the same sort of mid-budget semi-affectionate parody of existential angst that’s all tone and minimal substance.
I am retrospectively disturbed by how well “I really came in a fluffer that time” slots into Dorothy Parker’s flow.
the Pentagon’s CTO has AI psychosis now. sighhhhhhhhh
The whole argument can just be countered with “if the Pentagon believes Claude is sentient and a danger to the military, then why make a deal with OpenAI to use ChatGPT, another LLM similar to Claude? Wouldn’t that also be a danger of becoming sentient? and why are Pete Hegseth and Donald Trump planning to force Anthropic to comply after 6 months if they believe Claude shouldn’t be in the military?? Why did you ask Anthropic to let you use Claude for mass surveillance and autonomous weapons if you believed it was sentient and a danger??”
It just reeks of bullshit. “uhm actually we made Anthropic a supply chain risk because Claude is actually very dangerous and not because we’re doing banana republic shit to anyone who disagrees with us. we are a very responsible and safe government. please dont impeach trump.”
I wonder if one of the reasons Pete Hegseth is going so hard after Anthropic is that he and other idiots in the Pentagon unironically believes shit like AI 2027 and so wants to soft nationalize the frontier companies so to control the coming AGI. Considering that one of the uses the DoD allegedly wants LLMs for is fully autonomous weapons that at the very least have a very distorted view of what the technology is capable of. Or they want an accountability sink so they can kill people with even less accountability. …probably both.
I find it darkly hilarious that the doomer crit-hype is finally coming around to bite them, not in the form of heavy handed shut-it-all-down regulation to stop skynet, but in the form of authoritarian wackos wanting to make sure they are the ones “in charge” of skynet.
Has anyone heard of the Internal Family Systems Model? One of the CFAR founders said he relied on it when he was designing self-help workshops. The IFS encourages you to see yourself as a system of entities and talk to them separately, and that reminds me of Ziz Lasota’s two-hemispheres theory and Michael Vassar’s jailbreaking.
I’ve heard of it, including in some outlets that (at the distance I am to it) seemed to pass the sniff test
but I’ve also seen it kick around TPOT
so I’d definitely want to seek out the advice of an expert if I cared about it
I heard somewhere that “there is no unitary self” can be a Buddhist teaching and TPOT draws on Western Buddhism. There is work to be done figuring out where they got their eclectic mix of techniques and terminology.
It’s Hofstadter, isn’t it? That’s the author who I recognize most in these discussions, followed closely by Hermann Hesse.
Well, I think the Buddhist idea that the self is an illusion goes back 2500 years or more, but Douglas Richard Hofstadter might have introduced nerdy American sci-fi fans to the idea.
I have time to quote at you now. Ziz’s thoughts about dual-core brains sound like the thought experiments from “I” is a Strange Loop. In Chapter 15, “Entwinement”, Hofstadter introduces the Twinwirld thought experiment: imagine a world where almost everybody is an identical twin, each pair of twins is given one name, twins go everywhere together, and identity is oriented around pairs instead of individuals. Quoting p215 from my copy:
In Twinwirld, there is an unspoken and obvious understanding that the basic units are pairsons, not left or right halves, and that even though each dividual consists of two physically separate and distinguishable halves, the bond between those halves is so tight that the physical separateness doesn’t much matter. That everytwo is made of a left and right half is just a familiar fact about being alive, taken for granted like the fact that every half has two hands, and every hand has five fingers. Things have parts, to be sure, but that doesn’t mean that they don’t have integrity as a whole!
The entire section is written like this. I’ve read a bit of the Zizian lore and it sounds like it was lifted straight out of this chapter with words replaced. p216 in particular really shows off the Hofstadter tendency towards neopronouns:
The pronoun “you” also exists in Twinwirld, but it is plural only, which means that it is never used for addressing just one other dividual — it always denotes a group. “Do you know how to ski?” might be asked of an entire family, but never of just one twild or one pairent.
A young pairson in Twinwirld grows up with a natural sense of being just one unit, even though twey consist of two disconnected parts.
I don’t really know about Vassar’s writing. I do think that jailbreaking is somewhat related. I think that Hofstadter lays out their entire thesis in the first paragraph of Chapter 18, “The Blurry Glow of Human Identity”, p259:
Among the beliefs most universally shared by humanity is the idea “One body, one person”, or equivalently, “One brain, one soul”. I will call this idea the “caged-bird metaphor”, the cage being, of course, the cranium, and the bird being the soul. Such an image is so self-evident and so tacitly built into the way we all think about ourselves that to utter it explicitly would sound as pointless as saying, “One circle, one center” or “One finger, one fingernail”; to question it would be to risk giving the impression that you had more than one bat in your belfry. And yet doing precisely the latter has been the purpose of the past few chapters.
The second paragraph, right after that, might as well be quoted from LW. Check it out:
In contrast to the caged-bird metaphor, the idea I am proposing here is that since a normal adult human brain is a representationally universal “machine”, and since humans are social beings, an adult brain is the locus not only of one strange loop constituting the identity of the primary person associated with that brain, but of many strange-loop patterns that are coarse-grained copies of the primary strange loops housed in other brains. Thus, brain 1 contains strange loops 1, 2, 3, and so forth, each with its own level of detail. But since this notion is true of any brain, not just of brain 1, it entails the following flip side: Every normal adult human soul is housed in many brains at varying degrees of fidelity, and therefore every human consciousness or “I” lives at once in a collection of different brains, to different extents.
Buddhism’s not part of the book. It is part of the roots of IFS, though! So I think that you’d be better served looking at IFS or the ways that people quote Hesse if you want to find those Buddhist influences.
