(I can kind of understand that intellectual honesty can prompt people to question a narrative, and in some ways I respect it, but there comes a time when you need to ask yourself "am I being the best person I can be by defending slavery" and back away from the keyboard)
The poster deftly doesn't address the real moral question: what if conversion therapy (either for homosexuality or trans identification) worked ? Would it be ethical to allow it?
This is the difference between politics/ethics and science. As the old saying goes, just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.
"friendly neighborhood transhumanist liberal" asks why bans on "conversion therapy" for trans folks are being enacted without looking at the science, which they're surprised is non-existent
It's been a while since I immersed myself in SF publishing but I think that older terms like "New Wave" and "cyberpunk" were basically marketing terms riding off the hits that spawned them. I believe they were a collaboration between the fandom, magazines and publishers - not in any structured way, but like in music, a term is used to encompass many different acts.
One slubstack does not a genre name, tho. And it's broad enough to be meaningless. For example one of the first authors is Scott Alexander, who is not formally a programmer, just someone who hangs out online terminally. Vinge was a CS prof, but Banks afaik didn't have any formal CS training. Ken McLeod worked as a programmer, as did Charles Stross.
SF is a nerd author paradise and nowadays nerds program, so ... chicken and egg?
Includes all the usual suspects, but notably doesn't mention Ken MacLeod whose Fall Revolution series is probably too socialist[1]. Also avoids discussing Stross post-Singularity Sky.
[1] MacLeod's Corporation Wars trilogy has immersive VR, artificial conciousness rebelling against authority, and literal p-zombies but is also very anti-fascist, so no wonder it's not mentioned (also, it's unfortunately not very good)
I haven't experienced the situation you're describing myself, but it feels very plausible.
Similarly, all developed societies depend on a number of people selflessly working in positions of elected or non-elected authority (local councils, HOAs, school boards) and treating them like people who cannot afford to make any mistakes is not a recipe for increased democratic engagement.
Anyway, so far no-one has commented, negatively or otherwise, and I think most LWers are treating it as harmless fun.
Thanks! Does every LLM vendor publish them, or is it an Anthropic thing only?
And of course it's self-published by the vendor, so basically just PR.