Shai-Hulud
Article
Shai-Hulud is a recurring concept in the Astral Codex Ten archive, appearing 2 times across 2 issues between August 13, 2022 and September 11, 2025. The archive places it in contexts such as “any assassination attempt would have to be of a magnitude sufficient to threaten Shai-Hulud”; “populated only by the noble Shai-Hulud”. It most often appears alongside Eliezer Yudkowsky, ACX, Aella.
Metadata
- Category: Concepts
- Mention count: 2
- Issue count: 2
- First seen: August 13, 2022
- Last seen: September 11, 2025
Appears In
Related Pages
-
- Eliezer Yudkowsky (2 shared issues)
-
- ACX (1 shared issues)
-
- Aella (1 shared issues)
-
- AI (1 shared issues)
-
- AI 2027 team (1 shared issues)
-
- AI2027 (1 shared issues)
-
- ancient Greeks (1 shared issues)
-
- Anthropic (1 shared issues)
-
- Arakeen (1 shared issues)
-
- Arakeen sandtrout (1 shared issues)
-
- Arakis (1 shared issues)
-
- Atreides (1 shared issues)
External Links
Source Context
Recovered passages from the original issue text. When the raw archive preserved outbound links inside the source passage, they are listed directly under the quote.
Leto’s prescience, his nigh invulnerability, and his unrivaled levels of experience both personal and inherited [1] allow him to use this control to its utmost while never being much in danger of losing it; any assassination attempt would have to be of a magnitude sufficient to threaten Shai-Hulud, and Leto (for the most part) stays a safe distance from large bodies of water.
IABIED seems like another crazy shot in the dark. A book urging the general public to rise up and demand nuclear-level arms control for AI chips? Seems like a stretch, which is part of why I spend my limited resources on boring moderate AI 2027 talking points urging OpenAI to be 25% more transparent or whatever. But I’m just a blogger, not a genius. It is the genius’ prerogative to attempt seemingly impossible things. And the US public actually really hates AI. Of people with an opinion, more than two-thirds are against, with most saying they expect AI to harm them personally. Everyone has their own reason to loathe the technology. It will steal jobs, it will replace art with slop, it will help students cheat, it will further enrich billionaires, it will consume all the water and leave Earth a desiccated husk populated only by the noble Shai-Hulud. If everyone hates it, and we’re a democracy, couldn’t we just stop? Couldn’t we just say - this thing that everyone thinks will make their lives worse, we’ve decided not do it? If someone wrote exactly the right book, could they drop it like a little seed into this supersaturated solution of fear and hostility, and precipitate a sudden phase transition?
Inline links: actually really hates AI, stop