> do not consider yourself a contributor to humankind

Good lord. You could apply the same logic to any taxpaying resident of any country whose government is doing something bad. There's some truth to it, it's worth bearing in mind, but it's also the very definition of an Isolated Demand for Rigor.

▲

customguy 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> it's also the very definition of an Isolated Demand for Rigor.

As if the author excluded other examples? What is your criticism, that the principle can also be applied to other things?

▲

petesergeant 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Isolated Demand for Rigor

That is a fantastic term for something that seems to come up a lot, and I had not heard before.

▲

oconnor663 5 hours ago | parent [-]

https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/08/14/beware-isolated-demand...

	▲	wonnage 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Lmao all roads lead to the same navel gazing bullshit from Scott Alexander The man is the definition of a useful idiot https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/08/30/military-strikes-are-a...

▲

applfanboysbgon 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> You could apply the same logic to any taxpaying resident of any country whose government is doing something bad.

You can't, because those taxes are coerced from you at literal gunpoint if you refuse (or your property seized at gunpoint to the same effect). It's completely different than choosing to do that of your own free will.

When I was in the US, I did actively attempt to diminish my tax contribution as much as legally possible out of disgust at what it was used for, but nobody is morally tainted for being forced to contribute a small slice to something evil. Maybe there's a threshold where you should be actively laying down your life to resist, eg. if being forced to commit actual murder, but I don't think you can reasonably expect that of paying taxes at all.

---

Edit: rate-limited, attaching a reply to a below comment.

> The problem with avoiding taxes because of expenditures you think are bad is that you also reduce the pool available for things you think are good.

Indeed, but I also chose to contribute money to other good causes instead. In that way, the same sum could be used for 100% good instead of, say, 80% good 20% bad.

Now that I live in a country of my choosing, I am proud to pay taxes because of how they are used. 0% of my tax money goes to killing innocent people overseas, for instance.

▲

rpdillon 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> When I was in the US, I did actively attempt to diminish my tax contribution as much as legally possible

I like how this is being spun as virtuous. When multinational trillion-dollar companies do it, we say it's bad!

	▲	autoexec 5 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		When multinational trillion-dollar companies do it, it's purely for greed. Tax avoidance for moral reasons is dubious to start with, but at least ostensibly the motivation isn't the same as what drives thieves and muggers.
	▲	trumpdong 5 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		When Antifa attempts to keep more of its money so that Hindenburg can have less, that's good. When Hitler attempts to keep more of my money so that Hindenburg can have less, that's bad. That's because Hitler is worse than Hindenburg and Hindenburg is worse than Antifa.
	▲	Henchman21 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Let’s not ignore the fact that multinational trillion-dollar companies will venue shop for the least tax burden to satisfy what we presume is greed, while GP venue shopped for a place to call home where he wouldn’t need to minimize their tax burden because he agreed with the taxes. This is a massive difference in intent, which is why it’s bad when it’s multinationals.

▲

5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

gretch 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> but I don't think you can reasonably expect that of paying taxes at all.

You should beware that you've rationalized everything you do as good enough, and everything that other people do is morally questionable.

Have you set the bar for what is 'reasonable' to be extremely convenient for your own circumstances?

▲

applfanboysbgon 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Wrong. I specifically stated I hold myself to a higher bar than I held anyone else. I took actions to diminish my contribution, and eventually left. I do not begrudge other Americans who did less than I did.

▲

gretch 5 hours ago | parent [-]

> Wrong. I specifically stated I hold myself to a higher bar than I held anyone else. I took actions to diminish my contribution, and eventually left. I do not begrudge other Americans who did less than I did.

This is not what I was trying to say.

First let me state the assumption I made: You think that working at Anthropic/OpenAI is morally bad because that's the parent thread, and you made a comment about how somethings are good enough and other things are too bad to tolerate.

So yes, you hold yourself to the bar of I should not work at Anthropic/OpenAI - but the point is that this bar is convenient to hold yourself to.

Did you "took actions to diminish my contribution, and eventually left. I do not begrudge other Americans who did less than I did."

Or did you simply never work there, maybe never even had an offer to work there.

▲

applfanboysbgon 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I wasn't particularly commentating on specific companies. The scope of my reply was strictly responding to a claim that voluntarily choosing to contribute to an evil organization is the same as being physically coerced to do it.

That said, I do hold myself to professional standards that are 'inconvenient' as well. User surveillance, manipulative dark patterns for maximizing engagement and monetization, and just about everything else big tech does is antithetical to the way I live my life. I strive to develop software that I myself am happy to use and that my users are delighted to use. My career certainly got off to a slower and less lucrative start than it otherwise would have if I had no scruples about how I made a living. I could've made much more money if I harvested my users' data and sold it. And yet, I chose not to. That is a choice you can just make. If you were in a position where you were facing homelessness, I could understand taking any job you can get, but the people chasing $300k+ TC jobs at $evilcorp aren't usually in that position.

▲

salawat 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

This isn't the gotcha you think it is, and you're basically accusing the individual of "sour grapes". It isn't clever, it's plainly transparent, and about the easiest way to trivialize someone else's moral convictions. Shame on you. Be better.

	▲	gretch 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> This isn't the gotcha you think it is You really presume what I think about it huh? > It isn't clever Never said it was > easiest way to trivialize someone else's moral convictions Did not trivialize it at all. Regardless of what's "right" or "wrong" we are definitely in the territory of "advanced ethics" and not "trivial/beginner ethics"

▲

5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

graemep 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> When I was in the US, I did actively attempt to diminish my tax contribution as much as legally possible out of disgust at what it was used for

Social security? Medicare?

The problem with avoiding taxes because of expenditures you think are bad is that you also reduce the pool available for things you think are good. Every country will do a mix of things you judge good, and things you judge bad.

> nobody is morally tainted for being forced to contribute a small slice to something evil

I agree.