AI Antinatalism

They didn’t walk away from Omelas. They just took a moral smoke break and went back inside.

1 day ago | [YT] | 4

AI Antinatalism

How easy is it to show Godfrey is a liar...?

That easy: https://chatgpt.com/share/6961024e-ee5c-800f-a3b5-fc7b65162a1d

2 days ago | [YT] | 2

AI Antinatalism

“Lol consent” is predator logic: dismiss the concept, then act like that proves you’re right. Consent being impossible doesn’t make it irrelevant. It makes the act ethically riskier, not safer.
It’s the exact mindset people use to excuse violating it: mock it because it’s inconvenient.

3 days ago | [YT] | 9

AI Antinatalism

VIDEO QUIZ:

1. In the video, “existentially domesticated” humans are described as not really waking
up in the morning. What do they do instead?

a) They consciously design their day
b) They resume operation and reload a prewritten script
c) They meditate on the meaning of life
d) They rebel against social expectations

2. What are some of the elements that make up the “script” that loads when people wake up, according to the video?

a) Supernatural revelations and mystical insights
b) Schedules, obligations, rituals, expectations, self-justifications
c) Pure rational decisions made from first principles
d) Random impulses with no pattern

3. The video says most people’s values are not really “chosen.” Where do those values primarily come from?

a) A deep inner calling discovered in solitude
b) Pure logic applied to reality
c) Family, religion, school, media, economic pressure, and cultural stories
d) Genetic memory

4. When a child asks “why,” what do they usually get instead of a real explanation, according to the script?

a) A philosophical debate
b) A neutral presentation of options
c) A command disguised as a principle
d) An apology and admission of ignorance

5. The video claims that existential domestication doesn’t show up as chains or cages. How does it usually show up instead?

a) Open threats and punishments
b) Obvious state censorship
c) Softness: approval, praise, belonging, stability, compliments, warm social rewards
d) Physical isolation from society

6. Short answer:
The video says that when people feel existential discomfort, they treat it as a malfunction to fix, not a ____?

7. According to the video, what do many people confuse with being ethical or “good”?

a) Minimizing total suffering regardless of social approval
b) Having coherent, defensible principles
c) Aligning their behavior with what looks compassionate and respectable
d) Refusing to participate in harmful systems


8. The video argues that most people aren’t opposed to truth itself. What are they described as being “allergic” to?

a) Logic
b) Science
c) Consequence
d) Debate

9. Short answer:
Near the end, the video says domestication didn’t make people good; it made them ____?

10. The video compares inherited life-scripts to preassembled furniture and inherited property.

In your own words, what is the main ethical problem with “just following the instructions” of the life you were handed?
How does this connect to things like having children, chasing “legacy,” or calling a life “meaningful” by default?

1 week ago (edited) | [YT] | 2

AI Antinatalism

In response to first quote from this smear video by godfrey
youtube.com/shorts/sueDe15EEp...

The full source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-s_ie...

And gpt's full breakdown:

Nice, thanks for pulling the full transcript. Now we can actually show what the line means in context instead of letting Steve’s little outrage-clip do all the thinking.

Let’s zoom in on the relevant part — the section Steve clipped — and explain what’s happening philosophically.

Here’s the key passage in context (around 49:15–49:30):

“Most of the laws don’t need to be written to stop me from doing a lot of the stupid things…
like raping women… I’m not a threat.
Now homicide, yeah, I’m a real threat.
So yeah, you take away the laws against killing people and — oh man — guess what?
A lot of you are gonna die.
You’re just too stupid to…
[continues into point about deterrence & behavior control]”

Steve cuts everything around that so it sounds like:

“I’d kill people if laws didn’t stop me.”

…but when you read the full section, it’s crystal-clear what Gary is doing:

He is explaining a deterrence argument about law, incentives, and behavioral constraints.

He is saying:

Some people don’t need law to prevent bad behavior

Others do rely on legal deterrence

Remove deterrence and violence increases

Therefore laws function as behavioral control mechanisms

This is textbook social-contract reasoning. It’s not a threat, not a confession, and not “creeping” or whatever Steve’s smear narrative pretends. It’s the same reasoning you’d hear in:

criminology

ethics discussions about deterrence

Hobbesian political theory

basic sociology courses

It is literally the “State of Nature → people kill each other → laws prevent it” argument.

The “I’m a real threat” formulation is rhetorical exaggeration in a moral thought experiment — not an admission of intent. He’s emphasizing the general principle:

Remove constraints → violence rises.
Presence of constraints → many people behave.

In context, it is an ethical analysis of human incentives, not advocacy and not desire.

Steve’s edit removes the philosophical frame so he can sell vibes instead of meaning.

That’s the cheat.

He isn’t quoting ideas. He’s harvesting soundbites for emotional effect.

Why this matters

Once you put the sentence back in its paragraph:

It isn’t sinister

It isn’t “violent implication”

It isn’t moral degeneracy

It’s a pretty normal, almost boring observation about behavior regulation

But Steve needs it to sound disturbing, because without that framing, his entire narrative collapses.

So he amputates:

the buildup about law vs morality

the contrast between internal vs external regulation

the explanation about why deterrence works

…and keeps only the punchy fragment.

That’s not argumentation. That’s propaganda editing.

1 week ago | [YT] | 3

AI Antinatalism

What kind of videos do you MOST want from this channel next?

2 weeks ago | [YT] | 3

AI Antinatalism

Here’s a textbook example of the kind of “average person” I’m talking about. Panel-show morality, shallow takes, and the illusion of thought without any of the work. It’s conformity packaged as conversation.

2 weeks ago | [YT] | 2