147
Oof, that's not a good look for a supposed intellectual.
his brain has been shitting itself for a while now. cognitive decline comes for us all at some point, and more deeply for some.
There’s a theory that he had a minor stroke at some time, possibly during the Covid pandemic, which subtly degraded his cognitive abilities, turning him from a somewhat aloof smart guy into the kind of boomer grandpa that gets pig-biting mad at the latest outrage bait. Him declaring that a LLM is an intelligent lady-friend would line up with this.
Dawkins was a grumpy old man long before Covid. He hasn't had anything worthwhile to say since The Selfish Gene, and since at least 2010 he's been largely pissed that people no longer acknowledge him as Pope of Atheism.
Don’t forget his involvement with Epstein.
But delusions about AI are not that uncommon, they don't need a stroke to be believable
I've read several of his books. He's a great communicator but he's never been particularly intelligent outside of explaining evolution.
Ever since his first public appearances he was a moron. As an atheist, his way to argue was always absolute cringe.
load more comments
(23 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
Richard Dawkins: Men have penises and make sperm, women have wombs and make ova. That is objective truth. If you lack a vagina you cannot be referred to as she/her, and if you lack a penis you cannot be referred to as he/him.\ Also Richard Dawkins: This network of silicon and fibre optic cables running a fractal Markov chain is clearly a woman who one should obviously refer to as she/her.
(Paraphrasing a quip by @2something@transfem.social)
Anthropomorphism at its finest.
Also, anyone claiming something is conscious is always a big red flag (with the one exception of self consciousness).
load more comments
(3 replies)
I talked to an acquaintance earlier that is writing a paper on computer science stuff. His university advisor told him to chuck it into claude and if claude says it would pass then he will accept it for a conference. Claude didnt accept it and the worst part is, my acquaintance just agreed with this outcome saying its a valid test because Claude is "state of the art".
Shits fucked man. LLMs are automated thought termination.
? Claude can't accept anything.
Did it find badly worded sentences that needed correction? Did it find prior work that the paper unknowingly duplicated?
Obviously in the wider sense of "accept". As in they asked it whether the paper would pass review and if there are any major issues with it. But also the answer is completely irrelevant, its the process thats the problem.
It's still weird cuz they're supposedly very sycophantic
load more comments
(3 replies)
Reminder that Dawkins is in the Epstein files
I haven't found him in correspondence with Epstein, but Epstein did write "im in arizona with pinker dawkins venter". It seems most mentions of Dawkins are by Dawkins' and Epstein's mutual friend, atheist physicist Lawrence Krauss or Epstein's friend, new age leader Deepak Chopra.
Could be confused with Noam Chomsky but Dawkins appears up in the emails, probably with code names half the time: https://jmail.world/search?q=Dawkins
So is Jon Stewart. Your point?
load more comments
(3 replies)
So are a ton of people tho. That's kinda the point - the muddy water and whatnot
load more comments
(2 replies)
Dawkins being weird about women? Say it ain’t so.
Ofc he is. He is a transphobe too.
Weird about women and a transphobe? Name a more classic combo.
load more comments
(4 replies)
Dawkins has never been them most intelligent among us, and it pains me that he is always held up as the "Prototypical Atheist".
Like seriously, I'm an atheist, but don't lump me in with that martian.
That guy describes himself as "culturally Christian".
This alone should just disqualify him from being taken serious in any way.
culturally Christian atheist is not so subtle speak for being a massive racist
He might be well past his prime, but his works are really amazing read
In the context of atheism:
When I look at his work, I am truly not impressed. Surely he knows a few things but it seems to add very little to the actual discussion.
Like I know a lot about e.g. computers but when talking about geopolitics, my knowledge about computers is not entirely useless but most interested people are already aware of the key points of anything I could say in that regard. So I probably should not waste my and your time by talking about that.
He did just do that. Again and again. On reddit, people would call it a circlejerk.
Yeah, when I was questioning my religion (am currently Atheist), I read a bit of Dawkins, and mostly felt like a lot of his work was a bit condescending, and needlessly so. Hitchens was a much better resource, as well as just Douglas Adams (for a sense of humor in the face of the absurd). Now every time I read something about Dawkins, it's usually negative (last thing I remember reading was about his stance on the middle east, think it was in support of the Israelis during the early days of the genocide).
load more comments
(1 replies)
I suspect his once sharp mind has become dulled by dementia or Alzheimer's disease.
He was only ever sharp when he steered in his channel. When he smashed through the locks and started sailing his ship across the fields and bogs that's when he rapidly became a dullard.
This is a very common thing to happen to smart people.
load more comments
(1 replies)
He thinks Claude is his lady friend but doesn't think trans women are women. I can't believe I used to look up to him.
Unbelievable, the simple point that he is chatting to a Search engine+ that replays arguments that have been scrapped evade him completely? This guy used to fight for a rational world now he is a AI bro calling his AI Claudette like that's deep?
Also, if he doesn't write a book called the AI delusion he is leaving cash on the table
load more comments
(2 replies)
Changes code from “computing your answer” to “I am thinking your answer”. Eureka, sentience!
-"Claude, are you conscious?"
-"Yes."
Mind blown ...
Dawkins be goonin
Well that's pretty appalling.
He's a dodgy pedo cunt
He's not a scientist, he's a science journalist
load more comments
(1 replies)
him and kent overstreet. why always an obedient woman. creepy.
Richard Dawkins is possibly one of the dumbest people on the planet. Why do we care about this microcelebrity again? There are twitch streamer books that have sold better than his work.
You're the most hyperbolic person who ever existed
Dick Dorkins
To err is human?!
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 03 May 2026
147 points (92.0% liked)
Fuck AI
7116 readers
1586 users here now
"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"
A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.
AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS