Luddites in the age of AI don't exist.
Until at least some data centers get burned down to the ground, comparing the current anti-AI movement to Luddites is just ridiculous.
Rethinking the Luddites
211–220 of 572 posts
Re: Rethinking the Luddites
#212Earlier quoted context omitted.
> By replacing labour with robots and not compensating them, you're sending a clear message that you don't respect people and the value that they bring. Companies already send that clear message even without AI. That's why there's fear here: we expect companies to behave as they always have, and that is with a level of contempt for human workers.
> Companies already send that clear message even without AI. Companies are people. You are saying people running those companies are doing that to other people
Oh boy, if you have an hour of time, maybe you should think about reading
Meditations on Moloch
https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/
Re: Rethinking the Luddites
#213Earlier quoted context omitted.
luddites were not skeptical of technology, or even against it. They were against the way in which factory owners used technology to illegally displace them (as workers) and to falsely advertise the resulting textiles (selling low quality goods while claiming they were of higher quality) in order to undercut them and put them out of business.
The customer is responsible for accepting the level of quality of said goods. And it seems overwhelmingly that they (thru their action, rather than words), prefer to have cheaper, lower quality goods as long as it passes some threshold. Therefore, if a machine surpasses this threshold, they will win marketshare.
If I understand you correctly, selling counterfeit/falsely marketed goods is only a problem if enough buyers can tell the difference?
Re: Rethinking the Luddites
#214Earlier quoted context omitted.
100 oligarchs can own everything and trade among each other to fulfill their megaprojects. Does a pharaoh care who built his pyramid? Or spaceship? The workers will still be needed to laugh at their suffering. Unless robots get better than humans even at that.
Where are the pharaohs today? That sort of social imbalance leads inevitably to revolution. Always has. It's not sustainable.
The pharaohs of today? They are launching war against their neighbors in Ukraine.
Re: Rethinking the Luddites
#215Earlier quoted context omitted.
What about as consumers then? Without workers who's going to buy anything? We have some serious logistics to figure out if we automate the majority of jobs away, and yet somehow all these companies are expecting people to still be able to buy their products.
There will be more companies making things and providing things than there are today because there’s more labor available. We can do the things that aren’t of higher necessity today.
This is similar to:
Replacing horses with cars will free up those horses to do other productive work, like pulling plows and turning stone mills, thereby benifiting the horses.
Re: Rethinking the Luddites
#216Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, then I won't "press". I'll just release a product and see if the market wants it.
So it's okay to perform the harmful act, knowing the harm it will cause, as long as you leave yourself the out of being able to say it'd have come to nothing had others declined to participate? I once heard a heroin dealer make a similar claim.
So you're now comparing AI use to heroin use? Not the most accurate comparison if you ask me.
Re: Rethinking the Luddites
#217Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the compensation comes in the form of lower prices, greater availability of the products, a higher standard of living and newly gained freedom for the worker. They can do something else now. The compensation maybe isn't as explicit or obvious as receiving an "automation dividend" check every month. That's what securities are for!
Is this a billboard for Capital in the whole Capital vs Labor debate? “Laborers fret not, you’ve been liberated from your job actually, and I sure hope you bought securities!”
we've all mostly been liberated from back breaking agricultural farm work in developed countries, no? At least in countries that have automated. Don't think you can say the same for countries without automation. We've reaped tremendous benefits that are just totally lost / taken for granted by the luddites.
Re: Rethinking the Luddites
#218It's telling that this anti-automation and anti-AI movement is finally reaching its crescendo now that creative and white collar jobs are under threat. These same people writing books about the evils of AI sat back over the last few decades as countless factory jobs, farm jobs, retail jobs and even "lower class" intellectual jobs (like bookkeepers, travel agents and telephone operators) were automated away. "It's jus…
> Well the exact same argument applies now.
Not exactly. Old school automations are pretty limited. You can’t automate everything so there will always be work for humans.
Automation is what allows our quality of life today so I wouldn’t knock it.
AI though could potentially eliminate all jobs. How the heck is society going to function after that I have no idea.
In its current state it has the potential to eliminate “low end” beginner jobs. That’s problematic because if you don’t have juniors professionals today … you won’t have seniors in the future. Now you could argue that AI would develop to takeover senior jobs too but that’s not a sure thing. It would be really bad if you bet the farm on AI continuing to progress at a certain pace and it didn’t happen - we could even get another AI Winter as all the low hanging fruit from the advancement of tech the last few decades are picked clean.
Re: Rethinking the Luddites
#219Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Companies already send that clear message even without AI. Companies are people. You are saying people running those companies are doing that to other people
> Companies are people. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. - Aristotle Companies exhibit emergent behavior that might be hard, if at all possible, to predict if you only had a single individual as reference. For instance, most individuals would probably never agree to manufacture a weapon that is specifically requested to kill your neighbor. However, this same individual will show no empathy and remorse…
> For instance, most individuals would probably never agree to manufacture a weapon that is specifically requested to kill your neighbor.
Are you talking about gun manufacturing for law enforcement or military purposes? Because those weapons aren’t manufactured to kill one specific person (my neighbor).
If somehow the government were to pay me adequately to hand-craft a gun for the police or military, I would have no moral compunctions in doing so. I see no reason for the government to ask me to hand-make an inferior good at such high cost, though.
Re: Rethinking the Luddites
#220It's telling that this anti-automation and anti-AI movement is finally reaching its crescendo now that creative and white collar jobs are under threat. These same people writing books about the evils of AI sat back over the last few decades as countless factory jobs, farm jobs, retail jobs and even "lower class" intellectual jobs (like bookkeepers, travel agents and telephone operators) were automated away. "It's jus…
> It's telling that this anti-automation and anti-AI movement is finally reaching its crescendo
Is it? I just fail to see how it "reaching its crescendo". Luddites DID destroy machines. Where are the anti-AI people buring data centers down?
If anything I will say there is barely any anti-AI movement happening around the world right now.
There are millions of vegan people choose to not eat meat as their lifestyles. Do you see people choose not to use AI product as their lifestyle? About zero? This is how small so-called anti-AI movement (if exist) is.