'It’s a common misconception that we recommend all EAs “marry to give,” or marry a high-net-worth individual with the intent of redirecting much of their wealth to effective causes'
'It’s a common misconception that we recommend all EAs “marry to give,” or marry a high-net-worth individual with the intent of redirecting much of their wealth to effective causes'
The average marriage lasts for 100,000 hours. If used well, you can use this time to improve the lives of hundreds of people. A lot of people will tell you simply to “marry whoever you’re passionate...
An old post from Caroline Ellison's tumblr, since deleted.
EA is not a religion. Anyway, here are some pros / cons to marrying outside the religion.
...the less committed end of the EA spectrum (do you sneak dairy products when no one’s looking? fantasize about owning a yacht?)
But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a yacht to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
25This starts out 100% indistinguishable from an April Fools post to the point where I had to check the archive date.
Actually looking back is maybe is satire in that annoying half-serious way (check out the nonsense hyperlinks destinations where the "humor" is a bit more obvious)
Also was I just shamed by someone who was in the environmentally horrifying bitcoin industry for keeping dry milk in my cupboard? No thank you.
23This definitely reads like the tedious "april fools" posts where you can tell they are actually 90% serious but want the cover of a joke.
16Exactly
4
Also was I just shamed by someone who was in the environmentally horrifying bitcoin industry for keeping dry milk in my cupboard? No thank you.
For the win!
10Come on, this is obvious satire, it is basically page from EA talking about 10.000 hours shit and find replacing a few words. Even the notes call it out as satire.
Of course satire is dumb, as it always is a signal towards the incrowd and a lot of the times backfires spectacularly (see starship troopers the movie (the book does the other thing, it is intended as serious, but the arguments are so bad that you can read it as 'this is the story of a dumb failson who gets more and more taken in by propaganda, as he fails to see (or intentionally fails to see, which is part of the book re the whole hitting Zim in the face thing, which only 'occurs' after the guy admits he did it, and not when Zim is walking around with a huge black eye) how he is being manipulated and the system is being used to get rid of people smarter than him by moving them into more dangerous warzones). Anyway back to the movie, intended as a satire of fascist militarism, but now constantly smugly repeated by actual fascists/far right bs mongers). It always amazes me a bit that the Rationalists don't talk about how dumb it is to use satire more. (vs all their other meta level stuff about how people disagree and discuss things and who should and should not be allowed to speak) I think it is probably because satire can be so fun, and it is intellectually rewarding to get it while people you dislike don't get it. Sorry, this rant was sponsored by Helldiverse (im leaving that typo in)! Democracy!
8If Caroline Ellison hadn't been in an actual relationship with a "high net-worth individual" I would have said it was just straightforward satire, but given the context I think she's using mask of irony to pretend she isn't revealing her true self.
Her words may be satirical, but her actions were more like "this but unironically".
6
I'd say it's half-serious satire; she did end up dating a "high net-worth individual", after all.
3
Given that Ellison star-witnessed her ex into >200000 hours in the clink, I dread to think of what might happen to the person that marries her
20tired: polyamory on a basis of mutual love
wired: neoreactionary harem with stack ranking42
acatinulthar reblogged this from nihilsupernum and added:
I think that this is probably a parody but it honestly sounds like excellent life advice.
13WTF is an “EA”?
Didn’t people learn in high school that if you use Initials or an acronym you need to define it after the first use?
I’m seeing more and more of this sort of sloppy writing with little or no consideration for the reader without intimate knowledge of the writers’ niche wank genre.
4if only literally the fucking sidebar of the sub had a link explaining precisely what this was all about
22@dgerard If you're looking at awful.systems via a Mastodon client you never see the sidebar. Or even any indication that it isn't a Mastodon server.
16And I’m right here!
So a post appears in ‘ALL’ and I click on it. I’m not an aficionado of ‘sneer club’ so I don’t know what it’s about.
I’ve now gone through to the sidebar and I’m left rather uninformed due to the purposely opaque cliquey in-joke nature of the text there. I mean, those are definitely words, I’ll give you that.
The link at the top doesn’t help because i don’t have time to parse a whole article when a 10 word summation of the community would do.
But thanks.
1
I'm going to take a guess and say it's "effective altruism". Maybe???
20OK. Sounds good.
-1