YouKnowWhoTheFuckIAM@awful.systems
on 20 Apr 2024 09:10
nextcollapse
Yes, but that’s not relevant here
mawhrin@awful.systems
on 22 Apr 2024 12:08
collapse
two things: one, limited bureaucracy is not only good, it’s required for an institution to thrive. second, we only have bostrom’s word on the reasons, and i wouldn’t trust the motherfucker even with grating cheese (that is other colour than white).
gerikson@awful.systems
on 20 Apr 2024 09:43
collapse
Surprised they didn’t just do the agile thing and seek direct financial support from Peter Thiel.
titotal@awful.systems
on 20 Apr 2024 10:49
collapse
Oxford instituted a fundraising freeze. They knew the org could have gotten oodles funding from any number of strange tech people, they disliked it so much they didn’t care.
gerikson@awful.systems
on 20 Apr 2024 11:25
nextcollapse
I mean they could have cut ties entirely with Oxford.
YouKnowWhoTheFuckIAM@awful.systems
on 20 Apr 2024 18:24
collapse
I wonder how much they disliked it and how much they felt it was just using the Oxford brand and cheapening it. Only a slight but a qualitative difference. You can pump out all the awful shit you want at Oxford, but cheapen the brand with the increasingly zany antics of your dorky club and they might at least look twice.
AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space
on 20 Apr 2024 18:27
collapse
Has Oxford gone after the Scientologists calling their personality quiz the “Oxford Capacity Assessment” or something similar?
o7___o7@awful.systems
on 20 Apr 2024 19:39
nextcollapse
That’s named after Oxford, MS, wink wink
YouKnowWhoTheFuckIAM@awful.systems
on 20 Apr 2024 22:23
collapse
I would guess that their personal reach over the name is pretty limited by a number of factors, including that the town itself has quite a significant similar claim itself. “Oxford Brookes” university, for example, is not a part of Oxford the Ancient University, but it certainly helps their brand to be next door (and as far as I know it’s a perfectly fine institution as far as these things go).
The issue with the Future of Humanity Institute would be almost the other way around: that as long as it’s in-house, the university can hardly dissociate themselves from it.
dgerard@awful.systems
on 21 Apr 2024 07:51
collapse
formerly Oxford Polytechnic, then universitised in 1992
threaded - newest
Philisophers have kafkaesque bureaucracy? Weird.
Yes, but that’s not relevant here
two things: one, limited bureaucracy is not only good, it’s required for an institution to thrive. second, we only have bostrom’s word on the reasons, and i wouldn’t trust the motherfucker even with grating cheese (that is other colour than white).
Surprised they didn’t just do the agile thing and seek direct financial support from Peter Thiel.
Oxford instituted a fundraising freeze. They knew the org could have gotten oodles funding from any number of strange tech people, they disliked it so much they didn’t care.
I mean they could have cut ties entirely with Oxford.
I wonder how much they disliked it and how much they felt it was just using the Oxford brand and cheapening it. Only a slight but a qualitative difference. You can pump out all the awful shit you want at Oxford, but cheapen the brand with the increasingly zany antics of your dorky club and they might at least look twice.
Has Oxford gone after the Scientologists calling their personality quiz the “Oxford Capacity Assessment” or something similar?
That’s named after Oxford, MS, wink wink
I would guess that their personal reach over the name is pretty limited by a number of factors, including that the town itself has quite a significant similar claim itself. “Oxford Brookes” university, for example, is not a part of Oxford the Ancient University, but it certainly helps their brand to be next door (and as far as I know it’s a perfectly fine institution as far as these things go).
The issue with the Future of Humanity Institute would be almost the other way around: that as long as it’s in-house, the university can hardly dissociate themselves from it.
formerly Oxford Polytechnic, then universitised in 1992
In Cambridge, there’s a sign at the train station with a quiet joke…