I will find someone who I consider better than me in relevant ways, and have them provide the genetic material. I think that it would be immoral not to, and that it is impossible not to think this way after thinking seriously about it.

we’re definitely not a cult, I don’t know why anyone would think that

Consider it from your child’s perspective. There are many people who they could be born to. Who would they pick? Do you have any right to deny them the father they would choose? It would be like kidnapping a child – an unutterably selfish act. You have a duty to your children – you must act in their best interest, not yours.

I just don’t understand how so many TESCREAL thoughts and ideas fit this broken fucking pattern. “have you thought about ? but have you really thought about it? you must not have cause if you did you would agree it was !”

and you really can tell you’re dealing with a cult when you start from the pretense that a child that doesn’t exist yet has a perspective — these fucking weirdos will have heaven and hell by any means, no matter how much math and statistics they have to abuse past the breaking point to do it.

and just like with any religious fundamentalist, the child doesn’t have any autonomy. how could they, if all their behavior has already been simulated to perfection? there’s no room for an imperfect child’s happiness; for familial bonding; for normal human shit. all that must be cope, cause it doesn’t fit into a broken TESCREAL worldview.

[–] V0ldek@awful.systems 3 points 1 day ago

Funnily enough he makes a really strong case as to why he specifically definitely shouldn't be a father.

If you asked an embryo to pick parents it'd be like "oof, anyone but that guy please"

[–] blakestacey@awful.systems 17 points 1 week ago (2 children)

"Consider it from the perspective of someone who does not exist and therefore has no preferences. Who would they pick?"

[–] rook@awful.systems 12 points 1 week ago

Funny how right-wing types reaaaaaly love unborn kids. They’re the best focus group for almost any policy!

[–] zogwarg@awful.systems 4 points 1 week ago

And following the foregone conclusion of the author, someone who can never exist and therefore will remain forever hypothetical. (Unless the basilisk would also want to punish all you possible hypothetical children as extra incentive?).

PS- This is almost "A modest proposal" levels of bad, without being satire.

[–] rook@awful.systems 12 points 1 week ago

I will find someone who I consider better than me in relevant ways,

Lemme guess, rich, white, asshole? (now I write this, I realise it could be about the author of the blog post too, and not just the bull he’s seeking).

These people continue to be so utterly delusional about the nature of success. The desperate need to believe that genetics is destiny, and that the ultra-wealthy got that way because they are also ultra-competent instead of merely being ultra-lucky and/or ultra-rapacious.

I guess the future is a race to see what comes first… the ultra-wealthy habsburging themselves into oblivion, the oceans boiling, or a resurgence in the construction of hand-built artisanal tumbrels.

[–] dashdsrdash@awful.systems 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Tchah! Decker does not go far enough!

It is clear that there must be people better suited to raise children than a dimwit like him! He should arrange for his genetic superiors to breed, then give the babies to the perfect parents, and he should give them the one thing he has of value: money!

(and please have nothing else to do with children ever again, k thx bye)

[–] BigMuffin69@awful.systems 4 points 1 week ago

Same reaction. I don't see how you can stop at it's immoral for me to not breed with the Übermensch when the clear logical end is it's immoral for me to breed entirely. As a childless person, do I get to go to EA meet ups and wag my fingers at them for not being moral now?

[–] fnix@awful.systems 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It’s also telling how he shies away from bringing his line of thought to its logical conclusion: if you think you need to “optimize” your child’s genetics to perfection, why shouldn’t you try to optimize their environment like that as well? If you’re such an imperfect being with all your faulty genes after all then it’s probable you will make mistakes during parenting, so by your own logic thinking you would be suited to raise a child in the first place is a terrible crime no different from refusing cuckoldry.

And they call this “effective altruism”. Jesus Christ these people need help.

[–] Amoeba_Girl@awful.systems 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I thought the same thing too, but then I remembered. They don't believe that environment matters. It's all in the genes!

[–] self@awful.systems 6 points 1 week ago

of course — how can you be a pure individualist being who pulled themselves up from their bootstraps since birth if trivial things like parenting and the economic conditions that influenced everything from the quality of nutrition you got to the schools available to you to the amount of stress you had at home, mattered?

[–] BigMuffin69@awful.systems 6 points 1 week ago

I will find someone who I consider better than me in relevant ways, and have them provide the genetic material. I think that it would be immoral not to, and that it is impossible not to think this way after thinking seriously about it.

Corporate needs you to find the difference between this^ and our local cult leader is the sun god reborn, it's every woman's duty to carry his seed. It is immoral to deny his divine will.