She Wanted to Save the World From A.I. Then the Killings Started.

[Laird]

She Wanted to Save the World From A.I. Then the Killings Started. (paywalled but can be read for free at this archive link).

By Christopher Beam for The New York Times on July 6, 2025.

At first, Ziz LaSota seemed much like any other philosophically inclined young tech aspirant. Now, she and her followers are in jail, six people are dead, and Rationalists are examining whether their ideas played a role.

This is just for interest's sake. It doesn't seem to belong strictly in any A.I. thread, nor to be directly topical, but perhaps is indirectly topical given the references to Rationalism.

[Laird]

I've come across a couple of other recent articles in my feeds about rationalism in general that I thought were worth sharing, despite that only the second explicitly mentions the Zizian sect which is the subject of the article in the OP. I found that second article, written by an insider, to be more revealing and intriguing than the first, which nevertheless prevents pertinent facts.

The Rise of Silicon Valley’s Techno-Religion

Cade Metz
Aug. 4, 2025
The New York Times

Many of the A.I. world’s biggest names — including Shane Legg, a co-founder of Google’s DeepMind; Anthropic’s chief executive, Dario Amodei; and Paul Christiano, a former OpenAI researcher who now leads safety work at the U.S. Center for A.I. Standards and Innovation — have been influenced by Rationalist philosophy. Elon Musk, who runs his own A.I. company, said many of the community’s ideas aligned with his own.

Rationalists often identify as E.A.s ["effective altruists" --Laird]. And E.A.s often adopt Rationalist philosophies. Together, these two movements have pumped hundreds of millions of dollars into companies, research labs and think tanks that aim to build A.I. and ensure its safety. The biggest funders include wealthy tech moguls like Jaan Tallinn, a creator of the internet calling service Skype, and Dustin Moskovitz, a Facebook co-founder.

“What do cultish and fundamentalist religions often do?” Mr. Epstein added. “They get people to ignore their common sense about problems in the here and now in order to focus their attention on some fantastical future.”

Why Are There So Many Rationalist Cults?

Ozy Brennan
August 2025
Asterisk

The rationalist community was drawn together by AI researcher Eliezer Yudkowsky’s blog post series The Sequences, a set of essays about how to think more rationally. You would think, then, that they’d be paragons of critical thinking and skepticism — or at least that they wouldn’t wind up summoning demons.  

And yet, the rationalist community has hosted perhaps half a dozen small groups with very strange beliefs (including two separate groups that wound up interacting with demons). Some — which I won’t name in this article for privacy reasons — seem to have caused no harm but bad takes. But the most famous, a loose group of vegan anarchist transhumanists nicknamed the Zizians, have been linked to six violent deaths. Other groups, while less violent, have left a trail of trauma in their wake. One is Black Lotus, a Burning Man camp led by alleged rapist Brent Dill, which developed a metaphysical system based on the tabletop roleplaying game Mage the Ascension. Another is Leverage Research, an independent research organization that became sucked into the occult and wound up as Workplace Harassment With New Age Characteristics.

The rationalist community as a whole is remarkably functional. Like any subculture, it is rife with gossip, personality conflicts, and drama that is utterly incomprehensible to outsiders. But overall, the community’s activities are less drinking the Kool-Aid and more mutual support and vegan-inclusive summer barbeques. 

Nevertheless, some groups within the community have wound up wildly dysfunctional–a term I’m using to sidestep definitional arguments about what is and isn’t a cult. And some of the blame can be put on the rationalist community’s marketing.

The Sequences make certain implicit promises. There is an art of thinking better, and we’ve figured it out. If you learn it, you can solve all your problems, become brilliant and hardworking and successful and happy, and be one of the small elite shaping not only society but the entire future of humanity. 

This is, not to put too fine a point on it, not true.

2073 is a pretty good movie that portrays "The Event" as an end result of billionaire control and world destruction, yet the world is still going in this story, just in a rationalist billionaire scenario of complete and utter control of the rest of the population. There is quite a bit of real and current history involved in the telling of this story.

I always find it amazing how far down the rabbit hole certain people will go, and I often wonder how prone they were to falling in that hole to begin with. To me, Ziz is a great example of 'highly likely to fall' and likely already very disturbed and needing help. But it is my opinion that the American society we live in does not intervene or evaluate until after some kind of damage is done, and usually loss of life or major financial loss. The belief that "human rights" are above the rights of society and public safety has been a thorn for some time now, at least since Reagan closed down the institutions and released the less fortunate into the public with a handful of pills and well wishes. I love to challenge human rights advocates to go ahead and adopt some of the mental health population off the streets, the ones they are so intent on protecting from forced medications or monitoring. Let them live in your house, and then we can talk about rights and freedoms after your life is destroyed.
Most everything theoretical, like equal rights regardless of how dangerous you might be, is intellectual hogwash to me. We need to be proactive with criminals, cults, and the delusional, and prevent this type of warped Ziz nonsense from spreading into the minds of those without a strong foundation. Violence should not be tolerated, period.

Just forcing them to clearly state an end goal will usually dilute the waters of insanity they swim in. They don't have a better plan, they never do.

There is always a build-up of momentum where you would think intervention would be a priority, where certain people are drawn in like the movement is some kind of black hole that destroys common sense and feelings of shared humanity while sucking you in. There are always the definitions of the enemy and dehumanizing/demonizing them by whatever means, usually because of alternate philosophies or life views, and sometimes religions.

We know what to watch for, and we have the technology and ability to keep it in check. Not doing so shows a society that has already collapsed, as does allowing homelessness, elderly abuse, child abuse, and the current medical / dental / mental health farce system based on profits. 

If these same delusional people would pick the proper dragons to slay and actually have a better society in mind, we would be celebrating them instead of jailing them.

[Laird]

The belief that "human rights" are above the rights of society and public safety has been a thorn for some time now, at least since Reagan closed down the institutions and released the less fortunate into the public with a handful of pills and well wishes. I love to challenge human rights advocates to go ahead and adopt some of the mental health population off the streets, the ones they are so intent on protecting from forced medications or monitoring. Let them live in your house, and then we can talk about rights and freedoms after your life is destroyed.
Most everything theoretical, like equal rights regardless of how dangerous you might be, is intellectual hogwash to me.

The irony is that those upon whom psychiatric medications are forced are more at risk of being subjected to violence than of perpetrating it. Your idea of our being a "danger" to society is a sad caricature - an in itself delusional belief. I've lived with many people, none of whom have told me I've "destroyed" their lives.

[Laird]

Violence should not be tolerated, period.

Another irony as you implicitly condone forced medication.

Another irony as you implicitly condone forced medication.

So you appear to think I'm talking about you, or that you fit the category of a dangerous person that needs to be medicated.
Sorry for you if that's the case, but we can't let deranged people decide this.
It is in no way violence to force violent and mentally deranged people to take medications, if you think so, it might explain why your responses are so vile and aggressive. The individual doesn't get to decide what is right for society, democracy does.
Why are your undies in a wad today? Take a deep breath. Chill. People get to have opinions in the real world, and you don't get to control that.
You can state your own opinion without attacking others, and try to respect that other people can think for themselves and don't have to share your vitriol.

A quick P.S.

I have a family member that NEEDS to stay on his medication. Without it we are all demons that need to be murdered, according to the voices in his head. He is currently refusing to take his medications and running across the country causing serious issues. I have tried to have him stay in my house, my sister has tried, and he has been in multiple situations where he was on lock-down in a mental ward, where he did get better and his medications were managed properly. He reverts to being a violent religious zealot, while being quite the pervert, when he isn't medicated.
So, I've been there, the struggles are real, and NO he can't be allowed to decide if he wants to be medicated. The alternative would be jail or institution at this point. So, try to be a bit more realistic about your own ideas, or don't. But I have my own serious reasons for my opinions.
Call it irony, or call it reality. I do condone forced medications, and I think institutions are a safe option that need to come back in this sick society.