I mean, why does it have to be one thing we are trying to not support? People in leftist spaces are trying to root out AI because of its myriad global problems and the way that the industry is akin to a new type of destructive bomb in the class war. Consolidating more wealth and power into the hands of the same technocrat few, poisoning the earth, destroying the livelihood of artists (and entire companies and divisions of workers across multiple industries because bosses are seeing dollar signs), stealing from the many and giving to the few in terms of creativity, it’s set to benefit the VCs…what is there to like about it?
You’re seeing a lot of talk about it because so many people thoughtlessly bought in when the more moral action would be to abstain from using it and insist on spaces that don’t welcome it. It’s not really that we are shifting energy away from more important things. It’s just that people will always say “hey, can we not use this here?” And you’re acting like we’re letting starving orphans starve so we can fight AI.
There’s nothing immoral about AI, and it doesn’t steal from anything. Ideas can’t be owned, and copyright and intellectual property are capitalist nonsense. If you don’t want to share an idea, don’t bring it into the world. Because once you do, it collectively belongs to the human condition.
This is a discussion for governance. It does nobody any good to allow anti ai warriors to start brigading every post containing so called “ai slop”. It’s just a new pointless diversion for keyboard warriors to fight over, accomplishing nothing in the process but derailing any meaningful discussion on the content of the OP. There are other ways to fight back against corporate power, such as making access to genAI technology free and open source, like db0s ai horde project.
@Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com you should’ve given this idiot a perma. I’ve seen them before trolling in similar ways. They’re absolutely not someone who benefits this community.
Most of those claims could be applied to factories, though, or to most technologies.
I don’t like this trend because it’s a conservative approach IMHO. A little primitivist even.
Think of a chair factory. It took jobs away from artisans. It allowed fewer capitalist to further exploit workers and concentrate wealth. It hurt the environment way more than artisan chair making…
But those factories and their workers are the base of the socialist movement. Giving the control of those means of production to the workers. Not destroying them.
If we are talking about destroying the means of production instead of taking control of them in my opinion we are talking about other thing, not socialism.
I worries me because it tilts the objectives that I think have the socialist movement. And it stirs towards other port that I don’t know if I’m comfortable arriving.
100% agree with you - it’s the very definition of reactionary. And in order to buy into the anti-AI argument you have to accept the argument that IP property rights are legitimate, so it’s essentially a neo-liberal position. Property rights are the foundation of right wing politics. That’s why we have copyleft.
And in order to buy into the anti-AI argument you have to accept the argument that IP property rights are legitimate, so it’s essentially a neo-liberal position.
This is also a good argument for outright banning anti-AI trolling like this instance wide. At best it’s a hypocritical position, at worst it goes against our core values.
Well…yeah. Mass production was a bad turn for the worker. That kinda proves my point. It led to consolidation of wealth and power in the hands of the barons.
And why is saying a technology is a net negative “primitivist?” Haven’t multiple technologies exploited everyone more while operating as spying and brainwash machines? At some point the more advanced technological advancements became more advanced tools of oppression.
Going back to “dumb” technologies and slower communication should very well be a goal for a more truly advanced society. Technology hasn’t set us free, in fact it’s almost exclusively been a tool of the bourgeoisie to further exploit everyone else. To demand more of our time, to steal more of our attention. I agree with pretty much all of what you said. But with just a different inflection in the point.
That’s what I mean. That’s an ideology for sure. But it is not socialism imho. It’s not about controlling the means of production and the technology to give us the advantages that the capitalists have now.
This other ideology is about returning to simpler times, I think. And I’m not about that.
I’m about controlling the factories, not returning to artisans.
Hm. I guess we just see things differently. I’m not subscribing to any idea simply because it falls under any particular label. I think a local system relying on artisans and local foods and the basic needs of those within the community coming first would be amazing. I don’t yearn for industrialized labor. Would a worker-owned system be better than what we have right now? Of course. But I think massive globalization, industrialization, and homogenization has been mostly a net negative, especially for the environment. You and I mostly agree. But if we’re talking utopia, or aspirational system, then smaller scale and localized would be best. I see seizing the means of production as a bandaid on a gaping wound. It helps, but it’s a first step because we need to start somewhere.
I mean, why does it have to be one thing we are trying to not support? People in leftist spaces are trying to root out AI because of its myriad global problems and the way that the industry is akin to a new type of destructive bomb in the class war. Consolidating more wealth and power into the hands of the same technocrat few, poisoning the earth, destroying the livelihood of artists (and entire companies and divisions of workers across multiple industries because bosses are seeing dollar signs), stealing from the many and giving to the few in terms of creativity, it’s set to benefit the VCs…what is there to like about it?
You’re seeing a lot of talk about it because so many people thoughtlessly bought in when the more moral action would be to abstain from using it and insist on spaces that don’t welcome it. It’s not really that we are shifting energy away from more important things. It’s just that people will always say “hey, can we not use this here?” And you’re acting like we’re letting starving orphans starve so we can fight AI.
There’s nothing immoral about AI, and it doesn’t steal from anything. Ideas can’t be owned, and copyright and intellectual property are capitalist nonsense. If you don’t want to share an idea, don’t bring it into the world. Because once you do, it collectively belongs to the human condition.
This is a discussion for governance. It does nobody any good to allow anti ai warriors to start brigading every post containing so called “ai slop”. It’s just a new pointless diversion for keyboard warriors to fight over, accomplishing nothing in the process but derailing any meaningful discussion on the content of the OP. There are other ways to fight back against corporate power, such as making access to genAI technology free and open source, like db0s ai horde project.
Removed by mod
@Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com you should’ve given this idiot a perma. I’ve seen them before trolling in similar ways. They’re absolutely not someone who benefits this community.
Most of those claims could be applied to factories, though, or to most technologies.
I don’t like this trend because it’s a conservative approach IMHO. A little primitivist even.
Think of a chair factory. It took jobs away from artisans. It allowed fewer capitalist to further exploit workers and concentrate wealth. It hurt the environment way more than artisan chair making…
But those factories and their workers are the base of the socialist movement. Giving the control of those means of production to the workers. Not destroying them.
If we are talking about destroying the means of production instead of taking control of them in my opinion we are talking about other thing, not socialism.
I worries me because it tilts the objectives that I think have the socialist movement. And it stirs towards other port that I don’t know if I’m comfortable arriving.
100% agree with you - it’s the very definition of reactionary. And in order to buy into the anti-AI argument you have to accept the argument that IP property rights are legitimate, so it’s essentially a neo-liberal position. Property rights are the foundation of right wing politics. That’s why we have copyleft.
This is also a good argument for outright banning anti-AI trolling like this instance wide. At best it’s a hypocritical position, at worst it goes against our core values.
Removed by mod
Well…yeah. Mass production was a bad turn for the worker. That kinda proves my point. It led to consolidation of wealth and power in the hands of the barons.
And why is saying a technology is a net negative “primitivist?” Haven’t multiple technologies exploited everyone more while operating as spying and brainwash machines? At some point the more advanced technological advancements became more advanced tools of oppression.
Going back to “dumb” technologies and slower communication should very well be a goal for a more truly advanced society. Technology hasn’t set us free, in fact it’s almost exclusively been a tool of the bourgeoisie to further exploit everyone else. To demand more of our time, to steal more of our attention. I agree with pretty much all of what you said. But with just a different inflection in the point.
That’s what I mean. That’s an ideology for sure. But it is not socialism imho. It’s not about controlling the means of production and the technology to give us the advantages that the capitalists have now.
This other ideology is about returning to simpler times, I think. And I’m not about that.
I’m about controlling the factories, not returning to artisans.
Hm. I guess we just see things differently. I’m not subscribing to any idea simply because it falls under any particular label. I think a local system relying on artisans and local foods and the basic needs of those within the community coming first would be amazing. I don’t yearn for industrialized labor. Would a worker-owned system be better than what we have right now? Of course. But I think massive globalization, industrialization, and homogenization has been mostly a net negative, especially for the environment. You and I mostly agree. But if we’re talking utopia, or aspirational system, then smaller scale and localized would be best. I see seizing the means of production as a bandaid on a gaping wound. It helps, but it’s a first step because we need to start somewhere.