we need to get better as a community in excluding extreme right authoritarian people from spaces associated with us. It’s bad stuff on its merits, it’s uncomfortable for many EAs who are not straight white men (not all necessarily obviously more than literally zero very right-wing people of colour are fine with this stuff, and some are in EA), and it makes me and I suspect other people nervous about publicly identifying with EA.
So you want EA orgs to use their clout to try and push for EA-associated spaces to not allow people that you and some amount of EAs don’t like?
I don’t want this. CEA can choose who it wants to invite to EAGs (and I think manages to block out extreme right authoritarians pretty well). Other orgs can invite who they want.
I find this desire for control over other people and spaces bad. I predict it has a chilling effect on ideas. A big chunk of thinking about AI (for better or worse) came from people who are at times uncomfortable to me and I guess you. Would you have endorsed not engaging with these people 10 years ago?
Also I just really don’t think there were many authoritarian right wingers at these events. Feels like the poster and I went to completely different events?
I find this desire for control over other people and spaces bad.
I think the key words in the text you quoted are “spaces associated with us”:
If it’s an EA space, then it isn’t really an “other” space.
If it’s a non-EA space that is somehow being coded by others as an EA space, then it’s reasonable for EA to distance itself from that space and to expect the other organization to make its non-EA nature quite clear.
Imagine there was someone with the same name as me writing vile nonsense on the internet, and others were misattributing it to me and making my life difficult. I would desire a measure of control over that situation, but it wouldn’t be to silence speech I find distasteful. It would be to protect my own valid interest in not being associated with that speech.
Hmmmm maybe. But what does distancing mean? Does it mean “saying we aren’t rationalists”? That option has always been available to EAs who aren’t. Does it mean “never booking events at lighthaven”? That seems pretty silencing.
So you want EA orgs to use their clout to try and push for EA-associated spaces to not allow people that you and some amount of EAs don’t like?
I don’t want this. CEA can choose who it wants to invite to EAGs (and I think manages to block out extreme right authoritarians pretty well). Other orgs can invite who they want.
I find this desire for control over other people and spaces bad. I predict it has a chilling effect on ideas. A big chunk of thinking about AI (for better or worse) came from people who are at times uncomfortable to me and I guess you. Would you have endorsed not engaging with these people 10 years ago?
Also I just really don’t think there were many authoritarian right wingers at these events. Feels like the poster and I went to completely different events?
I think the key words in the text you quoted are “spaces associated with us”:
If it’s an EA space, then it isn’t really an “other” space.
If it’s a non-EA space that is somehow being coded by others as an EA space, then it’s reasonable for EA to distance itself from that space and to expect the other organization to make its non-EA nature quite clear.
Imagine there was someone with the same name as me writing vile nonsense on the internet, and others were misattributing it to me and making my life difficult. I would desire a measure of control over that situation, but it wouldn’t be to silence speech I find distasteful. It would be to protect my own valid interest in not being associated with that speech.
Hmmmm maybe. But what does distancing mean? Does it mean “saying we aren’t rationalists”? That option has always been available to EAs who aren’t. Does it mean “never booking events at lighthaven”? That seems pretty silencing.