Aceticon

Well, that's the second part of my theory but I didn't went into it to avoid muddling the point I was making:

• I think the "neutral" majority shift more to one side or the other depending on who dominates society and the main sources of culture and information in it.

So in present "Greed is good" (very much a Sociopath slogan) times with mainstream media and a large section of the Culture production and distribution (in the form of TV, but also TV Show and Movie making) in the hands of extremelly wealthy people and when those we are told we should look up to are people like Musk (well, him specifically maybe not anymore) and Bezos, the "neutral" majority has shifted significantly towards the asshole side of things.

The World would be a lot different if our "heroes" were Scientists and Environmentalists.

Clearly you're not thinking of the poor genociders and genocide-enablers whose feelings were hurt by the evil demonstrators!

The anti-Terrorist legislation is worded in an extremelly broad way and abused like crazy to do things to people that a mere two decades ago would've been considered extreme abuses of power (such as holding people without charge for long periods and suspending habeas corpus and the right to the presence of a lawyer during interrogation in airports) even in the UK which is a country with strong know-your-place autocratic tendencies compared to most of Europe.

Further, there has long been "disturbing of public order" legislation that is so broadly defined that shouting is enough to fall foul of it, so that's what they tend to end up charging anti-system demonstrators (such as environmentalists and anti-war protestors) with, but not before they did the whole "holding them without charge and the right to a phone call thing" (basically psychological torture when applied to people who aren't hardenned criminals) to try and get them to confess in an "interview under caution".

By the way, the abuse of this legislation was more than forecasted back when it was passed in the aftermath of 9/11.

Granted, this article has been spinned to make it seem like "Anti"-Terrorism Legislation has been used to do even more autocratic shit than it is already used for.

Haven't you heard what the governments in the US, UK, Germany and even places like The Netherlands tell us: being against Genocide is being anti-Semitic, which is logically the same as saying that being a Genocider is a Jewish trait.

Whatever is going on here absolutely is extreme racism, only it's not anti-racists protecting Jews from Racism (otherwise people wouldn't be repeatedly implying that being a Genocider is a Jewish thing), it's people with White Supremacist mindsets defending The Last White Colonialist Nation In The World as they finalize their ethnic cleansing of the Arabs that occupy the land they're stealing, a land which by the way is were all the Whites-That-Aren't-Quite-Like-The-Rest-Of-Us are all supposed to move to.

This is also why I'm not at all surprised that this happens in the UK: the country is incredibly racist (I lived there and know it first hand and from personal stories from friends with Indian, African, Arab and Turkish ancestry, plus I lived elsewhere in Europe so have something to compare it to) and the elites there are especially so, though they usually disguise it behind a thick layer of learned poshness. The way the "anti"-Racisms laws are made there are all about suppressing the visible side of racism (loudy saying or writting racist things) not the actual acting in racist ways (as long as you don't voice it as such and hide it with some kind of "it's procedure" excuse, you can act as racist as you want) and even that "keeping of appearances" on Racism has stopped being enforced by the Justice System (were it wasn't even properly practiced to begin with) in the last decade or so, especially anti-Muslim Racism.

This comes from way back: for example, the person who was the Greenparty European Parliament Member about a decades ago (whose name now evades me) used to be under police surveillance for being an Environmentalist.

It's long been the case that in the UK anybody who is merelly perceived to threathen the interests of the power elites gets cracked down on hard by the Justice System and surveillance aparatus, and that has only become worse in the aftermath of 9/11 when quite extreme autocratic "anti-terrorism" legislation was passed, doing things like suspending habeas corpous and the right to having a lawyer present during interrogation for those on the wrong side of border control in airports (something used, for example, some years later to crack down on the Snowden Leaks that were bringing to light the extreme nature of digital surveilance of common citizens in the UK for a supposed Democracy - an extreme surveillance which, by the way, the government at the time made legal with retroactive effects, all the while getting the editor of The Guardian that allowed it to come out kicked-out, with the result that nobody ever talked about it anymore).

I immigrated to and lived in the UK for over a decade and by the time I left the country - about a year after the Leave Referendum vote - I was convinced that the UK was the "Most likely to turn Fascist country in Europe", as it was very autocratic compared to other countries I lived in. Mind you, Hungary and Slovakia seem to have beaten it to it, though maybe it just seems so because they're loud brutish Fascists rather than the UK's Posh Fascists that use the "Law" and talking behind closed doors to their peers in the right places of the System to have dissent crushed without directly getting their hands dirty.

The "Most moral army in the World" really showing their country's "Western values" there...

Years ago I concluded (wrongly or rightly) that most people are neutral, a small handfull are actually good people (willing to sacrifice their personal benefit for people they don't know with no expectation of gaining from it, even in the form of social approval) and a small handful are assholes, but the assholes do such a disproportionate amount of damage that they end up having a massive impact on everybody else.

The stuff in computer games that makes NPCs move around the game world from point A to point B has been called AI for ages (and in this case specifically, is generally the A* pathing algorithm which isn't even all that complex).

It's only recently that marketing-types, salesmen and journalists with no actual technical expertise have started pushing AI as if the I in the acronym actually meant general intelligence rather than the "intelligence-alike" meaning that it has had for decades.

Salesmanship is the essence of management at those levels.

Which brings us back around to the original subject of this thread - tech bros - in my own experienced in Tech recently and back in the 90s boom, this generation of founders and "influencers" aren't techies, they're people from areas heavy on salesmanship, not actually on creating complex things that objectivelly work.

The complete total dominance of sales types in both domains id why LLMs are being pushed the way they are as if they're some kind of emerging-AGI and lots of corporates believe it and are trying to hammer those square pegs into round holes even though the most basic of technical analises would tell them that it doesn't work like that.

Ultimately since the current societal structures we have massively benefit that kind or personality, we're going to keep on having these kinds of barely-useful-stuff-insanely-hyped-up cycles wasting tons of resources because salesmanship is hardly a synonym for efficiency or wisdom.

There are only two types of "Super High-IQ" people who will go for an unpaid job working in politics for the likes of Musk:

• Very naive young things, hence very inexperienced and who are going to do all mistakes in the book and then some for the next couple of years as they learn the ropes. By the time they know enough about the job they'll be burned out from working for a guy like Musk not to mention knowing enough to know they're better of elsewhere.
• Grifters looking for making maximum money from being in politics. Since they're not getting paid, that means corruption, lots and lots of corruption.

Also, even amongst the "very naive young things", in my own personal experience, the high intelligent types with the personality to be real believers of far right stuff, are at most above average intelligence but below genius level IQ (which is 120) and hence not really "super high"-IQ (which would more 160+) - I once worked with a guy like that who thought himself very intelligent and in his new job ended up working in an office with two genious level colleagues and he was very entertaining because of his "buttons" were so obvious and he was so easy to give the run around.

Super-high IQ people are often the very opposite of street smart, but one thing they aren't is stupid and at most fall into the first part of the saying "you can deceive most people some of the time, or some people all of the time, but you can't deceive most people all of the time" - they can be swindled but they'll figure it out faster than most.

They're running around looking for the thiefs.

Same moneys, fancier tools.