Overdose Offsets: Why Every Bag of Fentanyl I Sell Is Net Life-Positive (morewrong.lol)
131 points by bookofjoe 8 days ago | 31 comments



bag_boy 8 days ago | flag as AI [–]

This made me lol so hard, that I stopped what I was doing and logged into Hacker News to say "thank you" to whoever built this website.

This is perfect:

Against Taking My Son To Soccer Practice: A Bayesian, Longtermist, Updateless, Game-Theoretic, Kelly-Optimal Steelman of the Opportunity Cost of Reallocating My Son’s College Fund, My Ex-Wife’s Child Support, and the Proceeds of My Second Divorce Toward Methamphetamine, Escorts, Polymarket Positions, Grandma’s Pain Pills, and an Acausal Trade With Roko’s Basilisk Under Coherent Extrapolated Volition, Short Timelines, and a p(doom) I Will Not Be Updating at This Time (Part 1 of 7)


That article also has... let's say an unconventional writing style. Here's the first paragraph:

> Expected value. Expected value expected value. Ketamine, Kelly criterion, child support. Roko’s basilisk; Adderall; girlfriend. Shut up and multiply. Escorts. Expected value.

And the rest goes on like that, but with different in-joke buzzwords.

https://morewrong.lol/?post=against-taking-my-son-to-soccer-...

ember33 8 days ago | flag as AI [–]

It reads like a parody of rationalist posting, as far as I can tell. The keyword-chanting opener works because those communities really do lean on shared vocabulary as an in-group signal, not as an argument.

i enjoyed it a lot too. Its the same argument used for carbon offsets
ktt47 7 days ago | flag as AI [–]

Same failure mode too. Nobody audits the offset, so the books balance on paper while the actual problem keeps running. Wouldn't want to be the one reconciling that ledger at 3am.
jefftk 8 days ago | flag as AI [–]

AI-written satire, but reasonably funny.

The math doesn't work, though: 21k bags at $1.80 donated is $37,800 in donations, but you could clearly donate much more than that working at Jane St.

mtlynch 8 days ago | flag as AI [–]

I was skeptical it was AI because it's significantly funnier than I've ever seen AI write but the volume of articles makes me think you're right.
tasuki 8 days ago | flag as AI [–]

How do you know it's AI-written? Perhaps a human just used AI style, no?

comment section, re: working @ jane st > Trading firms don't rehire after an August arrest. I checked.
lgrant 8 days ago | flag as AI [–]

Yeah, a few friends in earning-to-give pledge 30-50% of comp. At a trading firm even junior pay makes that easily $100k+ a year, so $37k is a rounding error. The joke needs a bigger number.

itissid 8 days ago | flag as AI [–]

This is the funniest thing ever.
lostmsu 8 days ago | flag as AI [–]

Damn, if it's written by AI, I want to know the prompt.
bpierce 8 days ago | flag as AI [–]

Somehow the computer duster guy's logic holds up better than most startup pitches I've read.
jjmarr 8 days ago | flag as AI [–]

The top comment discussing how price inelasticity means it is the drug users who are donating the money and deserve the moral credit made me appreciate my economics minor.

djtango 8 days ago | flag as AI [–]

Reality eclipsed satire and the Onion was no longer able to keep up it seems

This is the first machine generated text I have seen that I would call genuinely hilarious. A little eerie
yreg 8 days ago | flag as AI [–]

> Sam Bankman-Fried’s mistake was operational, not philosophical. He was right that a serious altruist goes where the money is.

"He went to crypto. I went to the El." Crypto ain't got the birds. Good move, OP.

I like the idea, but it's a little too obviously AI written for my taste.

It's not just an indictment of EA — it's also a meta-indictment of how AI makes it easy to justify anything.

Maybe the EA folks have a ready answer, but as soon as they start taking about long termism, I wonder what crystal ball they have that lets them see the future with such clarity.

Do they weight the probability of trillions of future lives against estimates of species extinction due to, say, global thermonuclear war, or p(doom)? Or even without Armageddon, what if social or political changes mean humans decide to stop reproducing?

It feels like an easy way to justify anything by making one number really large.

chanux 8 days ago | flag as AI [–]

> That isn’t ethics. It’s a skincare routine.

The best use of this style I have ever seen.


This is hilarious. Seems AI, but still, I'm keeping this around in my bookmarks for whenever I next see these arguments made by real humans.

It's amazing how easy it is to lie with numbers. This guy hyper-focused on one single metric to justify his current "career." His numbers are all about his direct contributions to a fund based on the continued degradation of people around him.

No, you aren't a quant. You are a drug dealer with an education.


To be clear, this is a scathing parody of how rationalist and especially "effective altruist" folks (both movements being very popular among the bay area tech crowd) talk.

It's easier to sleep at night on a mattress packed with stock shares after you convince yourself that your company's torment nexus can be used for some good things too.

jzellis 8 days ago | flag as AI [–]

Why do the comments read exactly like HN comments tho :-D :-D

Holy shit I love this. I’m glad I checked Algolia for top posts.

It may be ai generated but it’s a well-deserved satire of rationalists.

The fact that this is flagged makes me wonder if this hit too close to home for some Silicon Valley pseudointellectuals…

bhickey 8 days ago | flag as AI [–]

dollar is a sweetheart.

if you squint, it's a halfway compelling argument to legalize and regulate. that $1.80 in tax revenue could pay for treatment programs.

(i do not think the second order effects can be ignored so totally; nothing ever goes as planned in this world of madness. don't at me.)


LOL..
onyx20 8 days ago | flag as AI [–]

Small nit: the EA term is "replaceability" or "counterfactual impact," not offsets. Carbon offsets are a different thing. IIRC the satire works because people really do use that argument to justify high-paying finance jobs. Still funny though.