The reason this conversation isn’t being had by communists is because it is techbro hype. I understand why you wouldn’t want to listen to me telling you that, but please listen to the other people trying to tell you that. There’s a reason you’re getting downvoted, it’s because people disagree with you and you’re not listening to them.
I’m not arguing for a “soul” or anything like that here, if anything, I’d say you’re the one arguing for impossible things to manifest through thought of will alone, you’re the one making idealist claims here, that if we just support it hard enough, AI will become the big tiddy robot girlfriend you’ve always dreamed of.
No one wants to admit they’ve fallen for a grift, I get it, it’s not a grift, I just “don’t see the potential” but I do, I really do. I see a future where the capitalist class has largely replaced the working class with automation, causing massive issues for the vast majority of people, I see the automation only being about 60% as effective as people, but twice as cheap to maintain. You’re trying to discuss things from under Elon Musk’s boot here and it’s very off-putting to see something like that here.
The reason this conversation isn’t being had by communists is because it is techbro hype. I understand why you wouldn’t want to listen to me telling you that, but please listen to the other people trying to tell you that. There’s a reason you’re getting downvoted, it’s because people disagree with you and you’re not listening to them.
The majority of people support capitalism but that doesn’t make them right, does it?
Anyway, AIs are already being used by people to make their jobs easier and even taking some jobs, or is this fake? Also I haven’t seen
I’d say you’re the one arguing for impossible things to manifest through thought of will alone, you’re the one making idealist claims here, that if we just support it hard enough, AI will become the big tiddy robot girlfriend you’ve always dreamed of.
I’m talking about continued development of AIs by the people, specially by open source, and people being able to use them in their lives and automating everything possible as it has already begun to happen.
You’re trying to discuss things from under Elon Musk’s boot here and it’s very off-putting to see something like that here.
When you say something like this that has nothing to do with the discussion it makes me wonder about how informed your comments really are. Have you used any AIs?
You dodged my question when I asked earlier if you had any programming experience, instead saying that you’ve “used AIs” as if using a product makes you an expert on the development of it. You’re accusing me of being uniformed but you’ve said nothing of value here, just that AIs “could” be amazing one day. This is pure 100% techbro hype. I’m not saying these products are useless or a waste of time, I’m saying you’re falling for bullshit marketing about them being “AIs.” You’re marveling at a fancy word assembly program acting like it could show real intelligence and drive. It cannot, and it never will because they aren’t designed that way. The term “AI” is just marketing hype. Please listen to that at least. These are not AIs. This is automation via algorithm. These aren’t “Artificial Intelligence” no matter what the marketing around them says. Real people are losing their jobs because people fall for the hype and assume these products can do things they cannot actually do. I don’t understand why you keep insisting that “open source” programs existing somehow will mean that it will all work out alright. I guess that’s why Linux is used in every office PC, not Windows. Under a socialist state, a program that can take away tedious labour from the workers would be a good thing, but under a capitalist system it will do nothing but make things worse. This is why I’m implying you’re under Elon Musk’s boot. Because it sounds like you’re acting like the capitalists will randomly decide to act in the interest of the people because this technology is just “so incredible.” It sounds like you’re living in a fantasy land where magical AIs will solve everyone’s problems and not actually cause a massive unemployment crisis due to marketing hype. I don’t know how old you are, but I’m old enough to remember the .com bubble of the late 90s/early 2000s. I remember how many businesses went “all in” on the new fancy tech because they were sold on a bunch of fancy marketing buzzwords and were told that this was “the future” I also remember a lot of companies going bankrupt as a result and their employees facing homeless and poverty because of that. This has the stink of every single big tech fad before it, and like every single tech fad before it, people think it isn’t a scam because it has fancy computer words attached to it.
You dodged my question when I asked earlier if you had any programming experience, instead saying that you’ve “used AIs” as if using a product makes you an expert on the development of it.
I guess I did. I know basic programmin which I use to calculate repetitive stuff for me, like basic simulations.
You’re marveling at a fancy word assembly program acting like it could show real intelligence and drive. It cannot, and it never will because they aren’t designed that way.
Which is why I’m talking about “AI systems”. Because a “word assembly program” as part or a large system should be enough to automate most jobs (by number of workers) if they can be made good enough, even if it takes years to adapt it for every enviroment.
Also there is quite a lot that can be done with “word predictors”. For exemple, an LLM system could look into all the data from a company and make graphs and spreadsheets by itself while also looking at comsuption/“the market”/internet talks and trends to see what it should produce and in which quantity while perhaps even keeping contact with the clients’ personal Als to be sure it doesn’t under or over produces. There could be programs and people being used to check for mistakes and hallucinations but it could be making the jobs of many while only requiring a few to check things over.
Another exaple is that we don’t have robots in larger numbers nowadays in big part because the ones that exist can only do repetitive work, but what about a robot that has an Al that can look at images to see what is where and “word predictors” trained on what it should do and with the data of moving a robot (it can predict the numbers it needs to input to move the robot as desired) that can then move the robot to interect with it’s enviroment. At least repetitive manual labor should be automatable with this which should hopefully increase unemployment a lot.
I don’t understand why you keep insisting that “open source" programs existing somehow will mean that it will all work out alright.
If I thought it would turn alright I would have just sat back and waited for immortality to be developed instead of discussing it online ;)
Under a socialist state, a program that can take away tedious labour from the workers would be a good thing, but under a capitalist system it will do nothing but make things worse.
Precisely, but there should be a transition period that might be the last chance we have to do somthing, and from my point of view this is the most important part.
Because it sounds like you’re acting like the capitalists will randomly decide to act in the interest of the people because this technology is just “so incredible.”
If that was the case I would let things go by themselves so I can bask in the fruits of Al’s labor instead of gauging the organization of workers for the changes that will come, no matter how big or small.
It sounds like you’re living in a fantasy land where magical Als will solve everyone’s problems and not actually cause a massive unemployment crisis due to marketing hype.
I think they will cause unemployment because they will be good enough to take peoples jobs. But as long as it can cause unemployment or directly increase worker organization it is a big thing to pay attention to.
This has the stink of every single big tech fad before it, and like every single tech fad before it, people think it isn’t a scam because it has fancy computer words attached to it.
I might be optimistic about the comming changes but what is already here will have an impact, and hopefully it is for the better in the long term.
I think I might’ve been misunderstand your argument this whole time. It seemed like you were in the “blindly pro-AI” camp that I hear all the time on other social media. I don’t know if we even fundamentally disagree overall and might’ve just been arguing past each other.
I don’t think the tech is anywhere near where you think it is, as people have been making claims of automated factories and robotic workers for 2 decades now and while we are “closer” than we were, that tech has always been about “a decade away” the entire time.
The key factor here is making robotic workers that can do the job in a more cost-efficient way than real workers, and that isn’t there yet. It’s too expensive and fails too often. I don’t think the systems will need to be perfect to replace workers, just “good enough.” Like how a lot of fast food restaurants use automated kiosks these days instead of having an extra person working on the till. Those things are unsanitary nightmares and break down and fail constantly, and people often struggle to use them, despite their design being as simple as possible. But despite not being “good” for either the restaurant or the customers, they are cheaper than having extra staff working.
That’s how this tech will emerge, not as a glorious automated revolution of labour, but as a messy robot forklift that knocks boxes over half the time, but has a much cheaper running cost than the workers. It will be bad for both workers and consumers, but will technically make a profit over the alternative. That’s why this is something we should oppose, not because the tech “isn’t there yet” but because the capitalists have no incentive to wait until it gets advanced enough. It just needs to be profitable enough, and every time that has happened in history, it’s always turned out worse for society.
That’s why this is something we should oppose, not because the tech “isn’t there yet” but because the capitalists have no incentive to wait until it gets advanced enough. It just needs to be profitable enough, and every time that has happened in history, it’s always turned out worse for society.
Have to disagree on this part. If we wait until it is good enough it will also mean good enough killer robots and drones.
The higher that unemployment is while the robotics is the least developed it will mean a bigger ammount of people that need revolution (because they hopefully would know that they will never get a job ever again because of increasing automation) while the capitalists are still dependent on the workers and can’t just do whatever they want with robots.
There will be unemployment because of this sooner or later so the more it workes in our favor and the quicker it ends the better for us.
The reason this conversation isn’t being had by communists is because it is techbro hype. I understand why you wouldn’t want to listen to me telling you that, but please listen to the other people trying to tell you that. There’s a reason you’re getting downvoted, it’s because people disagree with you and you’re not listening to them.
I’m not arguing for a “soul” or anything like that here, if anything, I’d say you’re the one arguing for impossible things to manifest through thought of will alone, you’re the one making idealist claims here, that if we just support it hard enough, AI will become the big tiddy robot girlfriend you’ve always dreamed of.
No one wants to admit they’ve fallen for a grift, I get it, it’s not a grift, I just “don’t see the potential” but I do, I really do. I see a future where the capitalist class has largely replaced the working class with automation, causing massive issues for the vast majority of people, I see the automation only being about 60% as effective as people, but twice as cheap to maintain. You’re trying to discuss things from under Elon Musk’s boot here and it’s very off-putting to see something like that here.
The majority of people support capitalism but that doesn’t make them right, does it?
Anyway, AIs are already being used by people to make their jobs easier and even taking some jobs, or is this fake? Also I haven’t seen
I’m talking about continued development of AIs by the people, specially by open source, and people being able to use them in their lives and automating everything possible as it has already begun to happen.
When you say something like this that has nothing to do with the discussion it makes me wonder about how informed your comments really are. Have you used any AIs?
You dodged my question when I asked earlier if you had any programming experience, instead saying that you’ve “used AIs” as if using a product makes you an expert on the development of it. You’re accusing me of being uniformed but you’ve said nothing of value here, just that AIs “could” be amazing one day. This is pure 100% techbro hype. I’m not saying these products are useless or a waste of time, I’m saying you’re falling for bullshit marketing about them being “AIs.” You’re marveling at a fancy word assembly program acting like it could show real intelligence and drive. It cannot, and it never will because they aren’t designed that way. The term “AI” is just marketing hype. Please listen to that at least. These are not AIs. This is automation via algorithm. These aren’t “Artificial Intelligence” no matter what the marketing around them says. Real people are losing their jobs because people fall for the hype and assume these products can do things they cannot actually do. I don’t understand why you keep insisting that “open source” programs existing somehow will mean that it will all work out alright. I guess that’s why Linux is used in every office PC, not Windows. Under a socialist state, a program that can take away tedious labour from the workers would be a good thing, but under a capitalist system it will do nothing but make things worse. This is why I’m implying you’re under Elon Musk’s boot. Because it sounds like you’re acting like the capitalists will randomly decide to act in the interest of the people because this technology is just “so incredible.” It sounds like you’re living in a fantasy land where magical AIs will solve everyone’s problems and not actually cause a massive unemployment crisis due to marketing hype. I don’t know how old you are, but I’m old enough to remember the .com bubble of the late 90s/early 2000s. I remember how many businesses went “all in” on the new fancy tech because they were sold on a bunch of fancy marketing buzzwords and were told that this was “the future” I also remember a lot of companies going bankrupt as a result and their employees facing homeless and poverty because of that. This has the stink of every single big tech fad before it, and like every single tech fad before it, people think it isn’t a scam because it has fancy computer words attached to it.
I guess I did. I know basic programmin which I use to calculate repetitive stuff for me, like basic simulations.
Which is why I’m talking about “AI systems”. Because a “word assembly program” as part or a large system should be enough to automate most jobs (by number of workers) if they can be made good enough, even if it takes years to adapt it for every enviroment.
Also there is quite a lot that can be done with “word predictors”. For exemple, an LLM system could look into all the data from a company and make graphs and spreadsheets by itself while also looking at comsuption/“the market”/internet talks and trends to see what it should produce and in which quantity while perhaps even keeping contact with the clients’ personal Als to be sure it doesn’t under or over produces. There could be programs and people being used to check for mistakes and hallucinations but it could be making the jobs of many while only requiring a few to check things over.
Another exaple is that we don’t have robots in larger numbers nowadays in big part because the ones that exist can only do repetitive work, but what about a robot that has an Al that can look at images to see what is where and “word predictors” trained on what it should do and with the data of moving a robot (it can predict the numbers it needs to input to move the robot as desired) that can then move the robot to interect with it’s enviroment. At least repetitive manual labor should be automatable with this which should hopefully increase unemployment a lot.
If I thought it would turn alright I would have just sat back and waited for immortality to be developed instead of discussing it online ;)
Precisely, but there should be a transition period that might be the last chance we have to do somthing, and from my point of view this is the most important part.
If that was the case I would let things go by themselves so I can bask in the fruits of Al’s labor instead of gauging the organization of workers for the changes that will come, no matter how big or small.
I think they will cause unemployment because they will be good enough to take peoples jobs. But as long as it can cause unemployment or directly increase worker organization it is a big thing to pay attention to.
I might be optimistic about the comming changes but what is already here will have an impact, and hopefully it is for the better in the long term.
I think I might’ve been misunderstand your argument this whole time. It seemed like you were in the “blindly pro-AI” camp that I hear all the time on other social media. I don’t know if we even fundamentally disagree overall and might’ve just been arguing past each other.
I don’t think the tech is anywhere near where you think it is, as people have been making claims of automated factories and robotic workers for 2 decades now and while we are “closer” than we were, that tech has always been about “a decade away” the entire time.
The key factor here is making robotic workers that can do the job in a more cost-efficient way than real workers, and that isn’t there yet. It’s too expensive and fails too often. I don’t think the systems will need to be perfect to replace workers, just “good enough.” Like how a lot of fast food restaurants use automated kiosks these days instead of having an extra person working on the till. Those things are unsanitary nightmares and break down and fail constantly, and people often struggle to use them, despite their design being as simple as possible. But despite not being “good” for either the restaurant or the customers, they are cheaper than having extra staff working.
That’s how this tech will emerge, not as a glorious automated revolution of labour, but as a messy robot forklift that knocks boxes over half the time, but has a much cheaper running cost than the workers. It will be bad for both workers and consumers, but will technically make a profit over the alternative. That’s why this is something we should oppose, not because the tech “isn’t there yet” but because the capitalists have no incentive to wait until it gets advanced enough. It just needs to be profitable enough, and every time that has happened in history, it’s always turned out worse for society.
Have to disagree on this part. If we wait until it is good enough it will also mean good enough killer robots and drones.
The higher that unemployment is while the robotics is the least developed it will mean a bigger ammount of people that need revolution (because they hopefully would know that they will never get a job ever again because of increasing automation) while the capitalists are still dependent on the workers and can’t just do whatever they want with robots.
There will be unemployment because of this sooner or later so the more it workes in our favor and the quicker it ends the better for us.