Hacker News Reader

Comment by gen220 | Hacker News Reader

Strongly recommend this profile in the NYer on Curtis Yarvin (who also uses "rationalism" to justify their beliefs) [0]. The section towards the end that reports on his meeting one of his supposed ideological heroes for an extended period of time is particularly illuminating.

I feel like the internet has led to an explosion of these such groups because it abstracts the "ideas" away from the "people". I suspect if most people were in a room or spent an extended amount of time around any of these self-professed, hyper-online rationalists, they would immediately disregard any theories they were able to cook up, no matter how clever or persuasively-argued they might be in their written down form.

[0]: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2025/06/09/curtis-yarvin-...

View on HN

> I feel like the internet has led to an explosion of these such groups because it abstracts the "ideas" away from the "people". I suspect if most people were in a room or spent an extended amount of time around any of these self-professed, hyper-online rationalists, they would immediately disregard any theories they were able to cook up, no matter how clever or persuasively-argued they might be in their written down form.

Likely the opposite. The internet has led to people being able to see the man behind the curtain, and realize how flawed the individuals pushing these ideas are. Whereas many intellectuals from 50 years back were just as bad if not worse, but able to maintain a false aura of intelligence by cutting themselves off from the masses.

Hard disagree. People use rationality to support the beliefs they already have, not to change those beliefs. The internet allows everyone to find something that supports anything.

I do it. You do it. I think a fascinating litmus test is asking yourself this question: “When did I last change my mind about something significant?” For most people the answer is “never”. If we lived in the world you described, most people’s answers would be “relatively recently”.

That relies on two assumptions that I don't think are true at all:

1. Most people who follow these beliefs will pay attention to/care about the man behind the curtain.

2. Most people who follow these beliefs will change their mind when shown that the man behind the curtain is a charlatan.

If anything, history shows us the opposite. Even in the modern world, it's easy for people to see that other people's thought leaders are charlatans, very difficult to see that our own are.

Why wouldn't this phenomenon start with writing itself (supercharged with the printing press), heck, even with oral myths ?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com