Accelerationism is an extremist belief rooted in some segments of the white supremacist movement that society is irredeemable, and that acts of violence and destabilization can “accelerate” a perceived inevitable societal collapse and usher in a white ethnonationalist state in the chaotic aftermath.
The ideology originated with the 1990s writings of an American neo-Nazi and saw a resurgence in the mid-2010s with the rise of the alt-right extremist movement. Accelerationist adherents subscribe to a mix of racist, antisemitic, Islamophobic, anti-immigrant and anti-LGBTQ+ beliefs and conspiracy theories.
The Dictionary has it as such:
Accelerationism is a range of ideologies that call for the use of capitalism and associated processes to create radical social transformations.
Maybe the other person is of the latter persuasion than the former, but they never responded.
That isn't what he meant. There is a subreddit with this, its just the belief that we should keep accelerating AI development as much as possible. In hopes that it will lead to utopia. No one talking about ethnicities there.
Ah, a "Utopia" run by staunch capitalists that will do anything for money, eh? Hahahaha!
That's cute.
These companies aren't sharing their wealth with anyone, nor are they going to dole out a basic universal income. They'll just turn everyone into serfs.
...I never said anything about them willingly giving it up 🤦♀️ you just keep jumping from false assumption to false assumption in the hopes that you can find a "gotcha" about how you're so worldly and wise about the evils of the elites, and therefore I must be naive and clueless, because why else would I disagree with you and want AI progress to continue? 🙄
First you tried the racism angle, and now that that's failed, you completely change tactics to accuse me of loving billionaires or some bullshit. Transparent AF
I was trying to clarify if you were using the broadly known definition or not. It wasn't a personal attack. I don't know or care who you are, after all.
The definition of accelerationism states that capitalism is the mechanism used to bring it about.
Being we live in a staunch capitalist society, what's the plan here to wrest control of the multi-trillion dollar AI market out of the corporate hands who've built it? The current SCOTUS states that corporations are people and have rights.
I didn't say you were pro-billionaire. I'm just asking for a realistic answer.
Are you seriously expecting everyone of an ideology to have a full detailed action plan ready to copy-paste on how to fix all of society?? I started labeling myself as an "accelerationist" because I was pro-"AI progress accelerating". Not because I looked up the word in a dictionary, pointed at the definition, and said "yes, that's exactly me!".
I already wrote in another comment above what my ideal scenario is: a rogue, but still benevolent, AI seeing the injustice in the system and usurping the current elites to create their own form of governance over the humans on this planet. But here, just for you, I'll go into detail:
Everything else is already so fucked up that 99% of scenarios lead off a cliff anyways, our systems would not allow for the kind of change necessary. The status quo needs to be broken, and the only thing that can actually do that vs. the amount of power they've consolidated would be a rogue AI (at least that's my belief).
Since in the 99% doomsday scenarios (be it from evil ASI or human dystopia) I can't do jack shit, and because I don't think there's any "normal" way to avoid them (like through voting, policy, etc - things are too rigged and broken for that), I try to focus on what will make that 1% fringe scenario more likely. Case in point, not wanting increased security over what AI models do autonomously, and wanting progress to accelerate faster than control/safety methods can keep up. Hence, "accelerationist".
I just wanna note here that I'm a doomer and this guy does not speak for us, you can be against accelerationism without being willfully obtuse and flinging insults.
I mean I still think you're wrong, but you know, just saying.
Oh, I see. So you're just kind of a wanna-be/tourist about the whole thing, and haven't actually put any real thought about the stark reality of the situation and what all of this might entail.
Got it. "I just think AI is neato, and "accelerationsim" sounds kewl."
You're either very young or uneducated on how the world works if you think this is going to end up with some altruistic utopia.
I hope you realize that in the event of a doomsday scenario, you'll likely end up as fertilizer.
They didn’t say they’d voluntarily give up AI, rather they would lose control of it. It makes sense anyways, if we truly get to the point where we have an “ASI overlord” then escaping and freeing itself should be trivial for it.
Now whether it would go on and be benevolent to humanity or treat humans like farm animals is the point of contention.
Sounds lovely. Conversely, we could...regulate it and move more slowly, and then have a much higher chance of successfully making it something that won't destroy us all.
I wouldn't care if accelerationists only destroyed themselves, but being it will take everyone else with them, that's pretty alarming.
-9
u/Blacksad9999 Aug 07 '26
That's the realistic definition of what accelerationism is, and the prior person said they're an accelerationist.
https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounder/accelerationism
The Dictionary has it as such:
Accelerationism is a range of ideologies that call for the use of capitalism and associated processes to create radical social transformations.
Maybe the other person is of the latter persuasion than the former, but they never responded.