Previous: A First Attempt at Blowing the Whistle
We pause here to note:
Once the press catches wind of Mz. Ziz, in the winter of 2025, they will overwhelmingly choose *not* to mention the Rationalists’ comportment (RC) towards her— as explored in pts. 3-18— when explaining the rift which formed between her & the Rationalists.
Having made this choice, the press is forced to find alternate reasons for riftery.
According to Wired Mag’s much-shared zarticle (Ziz article), Ziz landed herself on the Rationalist fringes due to her *forceful way* of stating that "ethical" AI should benefit both humans and animals.
Indeed, our Ziz is not only a vegan; she's the type of vegan who, on her blog, calls meat-eaters "flesh-eating monsters" (and she calls animals "people", which is... whatever; we have bigger fish to fry, if you'll pardon the expression.)
We can neither confirm nor deny that Mz. Ziz’s *forceful veganism* was a factor in the rift b/w her & the Rationalists. We do, however, raise an eyebrow at Wired’s choice to *omit* mentioning the RC towards Ziz, which, we believe, is *just as important as veganism* in explaining both the rift, & the events which are to follow.
Our eyebrow rises higher at Wired’s confident assertion that they have printed out the whole of Ziz’s blog, & have— during the *years* they've spent on the Ziz beat— read it multiple times, in its entirety. Ziz, on her blog, discusses the RC in painstaking detail; it is from her blog which we have primarily drawn *our* description of the RC.
We may generously imagine that Wired’s omission of the RC was, in part, an editorial choice. There are so many unpleasant angles & aspects of the RC that it does, w/out a doubt, take a long time to tell, & it does slow the pace down for readers who are here primarily for a rollicking “death cult” narrative.
*****
Next: New Things Can Be Built
***
Related Bonus Content (w/ possible spoilers):