The Russian IPs may also be a ploy by people at DOGE to cause doubt about the security of the NLRB to get play at a court in order to not disclose company secrets required for cases.
I guess DOGE wanted to write a report how they saw Russian IPs login in but it back fired because the people at NLRB have proof DOGE created the accounts.
There is an easy (but maybe incorrect) answer. People who give benefit of doubt in the face of obvious bullshit excuse are simply okay with alleged things happening. A stronger version of this claim is -- such people don't believe the bullshit excuse at all and want alleged things to happen.
The level of faith that there's in some of those communities is... Cultish.
These days I was reading on effective altruism, sbf, ftx debacle and macaskill influence on sbf. It's weird how long it is possible to go to justify someone's actions
And that's what scares me the most about those ideologies. With their p(doom) they basically say oh an infinite damage may happen! And to prevent an infinite damage, of course everything is allowed. And that absolutely doesn't bode well for democracy. And of course it goes well with the oligarchy at the silicon Valley because they see themselves as saviors
This is silicon valley and particularly Musk's logic put into practice in the government. Look at how they talk about driverless cars.
"Automobile deaths are bad and numerous, we want to get rid of them with driverless cars, which will kill people in the course of their development, but that's okay because remember we told you about the deaths we will prevent in the future? Therefore we can expend as many lives as we want now because by doing so we will save infinite lives. This is why we must be permitted to operate beta robots on public roads."
The rationale continues on to starship and neuralink. We have to go to Mars to save humanity, therefore you must tolerate starships exploding and destroying the ecosystem over your house. We have to invent this important medical device to save people, therefore we must conduct morally gray research on implanting devices into human brains. The justifications and rationalizations are endless.
Radical utopians think the ends justifies the means. But the problem is, utopia never arrives, so we never get the ends, but we certainly get the means.
The same is (almost) true of radical anti-dystopians. The problem is that their p(doom) is... shall we say uncalibrated? It may be a case of tiger repellent. But while they're trying to prevent their "doom", the damage they do is real. And they're willing to do unlimited amounts of it, because doom is really bad.
The "almost" part is because doom is sometimes real. Hitler, for example, really happened. The problem is that in 1931, say, it wasn't obvious that Hitler was actually going to become what he became. (Yeah, I know, Mein Kampf had already been written. It wasn't obvious that Hitler was actually going to be able to pull any of it off.) So in 1931, what was p(doom)? The doom everyone was trying to avoid in 1931 was economic. They weren't worried about trivial (!) little problems like a guy with a funny mustache who once wrote a nasty book.
So the p(doom) crowd, even if they're right that doom is coming, still are often wrong about which doom is coming, and so their steps to avoid it are just causing damage, and not preventing doom at all.
> The problem is that in 1931, say, it wasn't obvious that Hitler was actually going to become what he became
1923 was the Beer Hall putsch. It was clear to those who knew what they were looking at and didn't agree with the goals.
In 2016 people predicted Trump wouldn't leave office peacefully, and they turned out to be right. But people said "no your p(doom) is too high, you're deranged." But they were not calculating p(doom) they were calculating p(doom | narcissistic psychopath). The posterior probability skyrockets when you factor in the person has the same personality disorder in leaders that has spelled doom countless times throughout history.
Hitler wasn't the first Hitler, people had seen his type before, and we will continue to see his type in the future. Know the signs, they're not hard to spot if you know what to look for. Pretty much if someone's main complaint is "those people" then you have a good idea what they're all about.
When they start calling "those people" murderers, drug dealers, rapists, terrorists, gang members, then it's a foregone conclusion what they're all about. Hitler told Germans who he was in 1920 when he started giving public speeches against Jews. Trump told us who he was in 2016 (and arguably for decades before). They had no excuses then, and we have no excuses this time. We see it coming.
But his suggestion that they're connecting from Russian IPs as a ploy to make the NLRB seem insecure with the plan of using that as a way to make it unable to prosecute cases, is that really giving them the benefit of the doubt?
Isn't that instead to suspect them of a nefarious plan to basically cripple labour law enforcement?
I guess DOGE wanted to write a report how they saw Russian IPs login in but it back fired because the people at NLRB have proof DOGE created the accounts.
EDIT: edited for clarity.