> But let me return to Thiel’s list of possible apocalypses: artificial intelligence, climate change, bioweapons, nuclear war, fertility collapse. The list is unintentionally revealing. Thiel is probably not wrong to say that people are pretty worried about the climate crisis. But the examples of AI, bioweapons and fertility collapse in particular suggest that Thiel has confused the world’s worries for those of a very recherché set of aging tech entrepreneurs he hobnobs with. And the antichrist, too, seems very Silicon Valley-coded. This suggests, I think, that in Thiel’s mind there are two cosmic forces warring over creation itself, and they both consist of Peter and his friends.
If all the problems are caused by unregulated technology, the solution is obvious, isn't it?
Sadly, the whole culture around SV is based on libertarianism, so regulation isn't even considered.
This man is clearly delusional, and knowing that he uses his fortune to sway things one way or another based on his twisted perception of the world is scary.
The author clearly hates Thiel and spends most of the essay mocking Thiel and his ideas without actually engaging with the ideas. The author’s essay is itself meandering, dense with digressions and snide parentheticals. He faults Thiel for grandstanding and over-referencing but indulges in the same. Waste of time.
> So who or what is the antichrist? Thiel is admirably and uncharacteristically specific on this matter in a scattershot sort of way. The antichrist wants to erect a one-world state, which largely seems to mean any kind of global regulatory regime. Longtime Thiel watchers will recall his preoccupation with sovereignty and seasteading. The antichrist appears to be any force opposing that. The antichrist also is people who are against AI, especially those who seek to regulate it.
Antichrist will need a monopoly on AI to fend off competitors. It's likely he'll also need a rather unusual brain that can be fused with AI in some way. Certainly, no man living today meets the bar.
I'm puzzled by Thiel's role in all this. If he supports this sort of technocratic tyranny, why he's talking about it at all? If he's against it, why is he trying to whitewash AI?
I was almost willing to accept that Rene Girard had some academic value until I read more about him. It's hilarious to me that he writes an entire book arguing that scapegoating people is wrong and Christianity has single-handedly prevented scapegoating by relating to Jesus Christ, but then says political correctness is the Antichrist. If Christianity prevented scapegoating by telling the story of Jesus Christ, then shouldn't political correctness prevent scapegoating using the exact same tactics as Christianity? The whole point of political correctness is repenting the for the evils of the past. Isn't that exactly what you say works to prevent scapegoating Mr. Girard?
I get it. It's mockery but I think I can extract the ideas here from it.
tl;dr Peter Thiel believes that we will be presented with a large number of potential world-enders: climate change, AI, something else. We will be told that a united force under some person or small group will be able to forestall this end of the world. However, this is a power grab technique and in truth this consolidation of power itself will be the apocalypse.
Okay, so everyone who argues for collective action will be an agent of the antichrist. I mean, I get it. Basic collective action is about creating the safe free society we all rely on. Past a point it turns extractive, with the majority Omelasing the gifted few in order to preserve the status quo. That's the thing he's scared of.
Cool. To be honest, one of the things I really appreciate the Joe Rogan Experience podcast for this: you get the guest's best shot at telling you what he's about. Not someone else's mockery of it. Just the thing the guest himself thinks is the best form of what he's about rather than some game of telephone.
Looks like there's a Thiel episode. Let's hope it's good because I'm going to have to find a good drive to listen to it on.
Will be presented? We currently have a large number of people shouting that climate change is a world ender, that AI will become one, and that the next pandemic likely will be one.
Which makes it easy for the wanna-be world dominators. They don't have to manufacture the belief in the crisis; that's already here. They just have to exploit it.
(Or maybe they did have to manufacture belief in the crisis, but we're past that point now...)
One of the many sad consequences of inequality is that people like Peter Thiel have a platform to spout nonsense that belongs in a street-corner rant from a crazed-looking guy clutching a sign that says "THE END IS NEAR!!!"
Can someone who actually likes Thiel explain his allure? I find just about everything that comes out of his mouth vile, but apparently people listen to him.
I suspect that it's people who are absolutely unable to "put themselves in other's shoes"(c) so to speak. They can't think abstract enough to imagine themselves a different person in different circumstances. So from this starting point they threat every external/outside restriction on them as an attack. They are worse off after such restriction hence it is completely bad. People who try to attack him personally (via laws, regulation, activism etc.) the most are the worst and he predicts that there will be some ultimate devil who will attack poor Thiel the most in a near future. Thus he complains about common humanity problems like climate change, because he couldn't care less about climate change, his funds allow him to never experience it until his death. While regulation coming from that topic is abhorrent, because he sees it as an attack on himself. Same with taxes, urban development, education (elite already have enough 100k/year schools no more required, helthcare and so on)
People who like his speeches or similar thoughts, think the same way. They think it's a global attack on themselves, so they tend to look out for the new leaders to defend against it.
If you read Thiel’s internal emails with Mark Zuckerberg, it’s clear he thinks a lot about public perception and how to frame tech to the masses.
The antichrist stuff strikes me as a debate tactic. Public sentiment has been trending toward, “maybe tech is kinda bad” so to shift the frame, Thiel says something extreme he knows will get headlines like, “if you regulate tech you might be the antichrist.” He also sprinkles in “or maybe there’s a 1% chance tech kills everyone” to deflate tech criticism from the other angle.
My 2c is that most tech is actually good and 90% of public disdain comes from social media and phone addiction (Thiel apparently limits his kid to one hour of screen time per week) and that because social media’s downsides caught nearly everyone by surprise we’re overcorrecting with AI safety stuff.
There is no antichrist in Revelation, despite it being commonly believed. Instead, Revelation speaks of the Beast from the sea, the image of the Beast, and the Beast from the Earth (aka. the False Prophet).
The term 'antichrist' is only used in 1st and 2nd John and doesn't refer to a specific person at a particular time, but to anyone who denies Christ came in the flesh and came from God. 2nd John says there are many deceivers who deny Christ came in the flesh and are antichrist.
Based on word usage, grammar and sentence structure, it is commonly believed that Revelation was not written by the same author as the Gospel of John or 1st, 2nd and 3rd John, so linking the antichrist of 1st and 2nd John to characters in Revelation doesn't make sense.
23 comments
[ 5.4 ms ] story [ 46.0 ms ] threadIf all the problems are caused by unregulated technology, the solution is obvious, isn't it?
Sadly, the whole culture around SV is based on libertarianism, so regulation isn't even considered.
This man is clearly delusional, and knowing that he uses his fortune to sway things one way or another based on his twisted perception of the world is scary.
Antichrist will need a monopoly on AI to fend off competitors. It's likely he'll also need a rather unusual brain that can be fused with AI in some way. Certainly, no man living today meets the bar.
I'm puzzled by Thiel's role in all this. If he supports this sort of technocratic tyranny, why he's talking about it at all? If he's against it, why is he trying to whitewash AI?
tl;dr Peter Thiel believes that we will be presented with a large number of potential world-enders: climate change, AI, something else. We will be told that a united force under some person or small group will be able to forestall this end of the world. However, this is a power grab technique and in truth this consolidation of power itself will be the apocalypse.
Okay, so everyone who argues for collective action will be an agent of the antichrist. I mean, I get it. Basic collective action is about creating the safe free society we all rely on. Past a point it turns extractive, with the majority Omelasing the gifted few in order to preserve the status quo. That's the thing he's scared of.
Cool. To be honest, one of the things I really appreciate the Joe Rogan Experience podcast for this: you get the guest's best shot at telling you what he's about. Not someone else's mockery of it. Just the thing the guest himself thinks is the best form of what he's about rather than some game of telephone.
Looks like there's a Thiel episode. Let's hope it's good because I'm going to have to find a good drive to listen to it on.
Which makes it easy for the wanna-be world dominators. They don't have to manufacture the belief in the crisis; that's already here. They just have to exploit it.
(Or maybe they did have to manufacture belief in the crisis, but we're past that point now...)
People who like his speeches or similar thoughts, think the same way. They think it's a global attack on themselves, so they tend to look out for the new leaders to defend against it.
The antichrist stuff strikes me as a debate tactic. Public sentiment has been trending toward, “maybe tech is kinda bad” so to shift the frame, Thiel says something extreme he knows will get headlines like, “if you regulate tech you might be the antichrist.” He also sprinkles in “or maybe there’s a 1% chance tech kills everyone” to deflate tech criticism from the other angle.
My 2c is that most tech is actually good and 90% of public disdain comes from social media and phone addiction (Thiel apparently limits his kid to one hour of screen time per week) and that because social media’s downsides caught nearly everyone by surprise we’re overcorrecting with AI safety stuff.
https://www.techemails.com/p/mark-zuckerberg-peter-thiel-mil...
It does make for interesting reading.
The term 'antichrist' is only used in 1st and 2nd John and doesn't refer to a specific person at a particular time, but to anyone who denies Christ came in the flesh and came from God. 2nd John says there are many deceivers who deny Christ came in the flesh and are antichrist.
Based on word usage, grammar and sentence structure, it is commonly believed that Revelation was not written by the same author as the Gospel of John or 1st, 2nd and 3rd John, so linking the antichrist of 1st and 2nd John to characters in Revelation doesn't make sense.