There appear to be some inaccuracies, or at least motivated misinterpretations in this article. In the second paragraph she claims that her invitation to speak at the Internet Archive was cancelled because of the llama.cpp incident, but reading the actual text of the email it seems the bigger issue is the content of the neoreactionary statements she made in 2014-2015? In fact, nowhere in the text of the article itself does she address them, which seems to me to be the elephant in the room.
Comments
There appear to be some inaccuracies, or at least motivated misinterpretations in this article. In the second paragraph she claims that her invitation to speak at the Internet Archive was cancelled because of the llama.cpp incident, but reading the actual text of the email it seems the bigger issue is the content of the neoreactionary statements she made in 2014-2015? In fact, nowhere in the text of the article itself does she address them, which seems to me to be the elephant in the room.