Hacker News Reader

Comment by tptacek | Hacker News Reader

So he goes to extremely boring cringe meetups. Who cares?

This is entirely subjective. Hope you can see how this isn’t exactly a strong argument.

I'm still trying to figure out what the argument is.

The argument is that Sam Altman is a central player among the small group of extremely wealthy people whose personalities and decision-making decides how you and me will live our lives.

They buy and sell our politicians, set policy directly or by proxy, and make decisions that lead to prosperity for some and mass misery and death for others.

None of this is subtle or a conspiracy theory, it's how our society is structured, it's not particularly confusing unless you choose for it to be.

Because he went to the Bilderberg conference?

"The political-science professors, perfectly sane men, look at me with wonder when I talk about the ruling class in America. They say, “You are one of those conspiracy theorists. You think there’s a headquarters and they get together at the Bohemian Grove and run the United States.” Well, they do get together at the Bohemian Grove and do a lot of picking of Secretaries of State, anyway. But they don’t have to conspire. They all think alike. It goes back to the way we’re raised, the schools we went to–after all, I’m a reluctant member of this group. You don’t have to give orders to the editor of The New York Times. He is in place because he will respond to a crisis the way you want him to, as will the President, as will the head of the Chase Manhattan Bank."

- Gore Vidal

If you're trying to make a case that you're not a conspiracy theorist, your first cite probably shouldn't be Gore Vidal. But if you're just trying to be entertaining, he's hard to beat.

I don’t get it, are you saying that Sam Altman is not currently one of the most powerful and influential figures in the world, with the power to influence policy through deep pockets and connections? That he’s just an average Joe that has a CEO job like a million other CEOs?

Yes, I am saying Altman is not in fact one of the most powerful and influential figures in the world. Also that Gore Vidal is a 9/11 truther.

I've largely nodded along with you over the years but from the little I've read of Vidal's later years he wasn't a hard core truther (of the "they cut the steel and demolitioned the towers" ilk), more his usual cynic political realist self:

    I'm not a conspiracy theorist, I'm a conspiracy analyst.

    Everything the Bushites touch is screwed up. They could never have pulled off 9/11, even if they wanted to. Even if they longed to.

    They could step aside, though, or just go out to lunch while these terrible things were happening to the nation. I believe that of them.

~ Gore Vidal (2007) https://www.theguardian.com/books/2007/may/05/featuresreview...

It's entirely possible that he went further than accusing Bush et al. of being asleep at the wheel and being overly fond of Saudi oil, if so I missed that particular descent into the abyss.

Sure. We can probably amicably depart the thread here with the sentiment that Vidal is not the least controversial authority you could introduce to an argument about shadowy powers controlling the world. I like Vidal! I'm just saying, he's not like, the AskHistorians pick.

It's also just possible I'm wrong! Like, obviously? But I think we're all just hyperfixated on this guy because we can see ourselves wearing the same goofy blue sneakers as he did in the "Bilderburg" photo. It's a crab bucket thing. Our attention to him, I mean. He could end up being a supervillain! I just don't think he is right now; I think what he is is much more boring than that.

> I like Vidal! I'm just saying, he's not like, the AskHistorians pick.

We're in damn near furious agreement . . . although there's a few of the original AskHistorians academics from a decade back that would take Vidal over Jared Diamond in a heartbeat :)

Be well.

The argument:

Rich people control the world.

Rich people own the media.

Rich people run boards.

Rich people built up cults of personality. Influencers to lend credibility for their long terms plans.

Rich people then pick a rich friend or ‘make’ a new friend, and then promote their friend.

Rich people’s friends typically after their role is done are found to be sociopaths and liars and frauds.

But this is OK because remember Rich people control the media.

Not rich people are going to be living in the shit society that Rich people are planning for not rich people. AI is to play big role.

Now, ask any further question, we all know you are smart so this confusion of yours is due to your world model.

Let’s discuss your world model.

The upper middle class controls the world.

Control of boards doesn't matter.

Rich people don't control the media, because the upper middle class won't let them.

Sam Altman does not secretly control the world; see above.

I never said Sam did. Sam’s just a made man.

Interested in this theory of middle class controlling the world. My personal yardstick is: “whose interests are most served by the system?”

For example, “middle class” doesn’t want wars, revolution, things shaking up. Which is why comrades hate them. Upper classes despise them and lower classes want to kill them. :) So seriously, is it the “middle class controlling the world” that has cash fire hoses gushing dollars “abroad” while “middle class” struggles to hold on to its shrinking perch?

Do enlighten me brother.

Hah I just read about "Bohemian Grove." Do techies consider that sacred ground because Oppenheimer discussed the atomic bomb there? The idol worship present in SV is so thick I can hardly see anything else.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com