worse still — we aren’t even talking about socialization. What Sanders is talking about is (partial) nationalization. The question we are debating is not “Should the workers take over?” but “Should the government?” It may have escaped the notice of those in that debate, but the current government is not particularly sympathetic to socialist interests. That Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders have both “called for the nationalization of AI firms” is presented by Guastella as a positive thing, as transcending the partisan divide. We think it represents a grave strategic error.
This is particularly crucial precisely because AI is attacking many of the most privileged workers, bringing the logic of mass production to realms that have so far been relatively protected from it. Take, for example, therapists. It’s easy to picture the capitalist AI future for mass-produced therapy: it’s not the rosy picture of full automation, in which a chatbot can provide competent therapy for the masses. The future in which we all have dozens of “agents” working on our behalf (or whatever the current sales pitch may be) will look bleak — like a single therapist overseeing window after window of AI chat interfaces. Client after client is talking to a language model, the trained professional is there to oversee the chats — scanning them for dangers and possible liabilities. The provided care will be of dubious quality — but boy, will it be cheap.
(still guild-related thought pattern (is it proudhonism or whatever it’s called?), but at least approaching humane thought rather than previous drivel (linked at the top of the article)
no mentions of ai weapons systems, of course.
I guess we forgot about the “fully automated” part of Fully Automated Luxury Gay Space Communism.
I thought we were working towards a future where if we want to work then we can, not be forced or coerced to work and thus be alienated from our work. Wouldn’t robots and automation (i refuse to call them AI) facilitate that?
I think we need the Gay Communism in place first, then fully automated, then space. Order of operations is important
It seems like the opening post (the quote within) was advocating to get rid of the automation altogether, even though they are supposed to be under our control during socialism and the switch to communism.
I think this comment makes a better argument, or at least says it better than what I was trying to say: https://hexbear.net/comment/7327862
Throwing our entire capacity of compute power to make a hodgepodge facsimile of all online interactions and media, and draining our critical resources for computer technology, is not going to bring us communism.
You can have communism with steam age technology, you just have to learn how to share things, live together, and not waste everything.
We could also theoretically go back in caves and live a communal lifestyle together except we wouldn’t be pushing humanity beyond capitalism since that would remain the dominant mode of production and development.
I swear you Luddites are pulling the socialist movement back with this bullshit.
I’m not exactly advocating going back in caves (which is largely ahistorical), I want to maintain at least the microchip, the Web, the LED bulb, CRISPR, and the technological supports for these.
I do not advocate blindly following the Economy into loops of compulsive consumption. Take a look at our reserves of critical mineral resources (including construction-grade sand) and topsoil, the rate at which humanity is blowing through them. Then ask yourself how many years we have left of resource supply and whether reaching those points of depletion in the coming century is advancing humanity, or dooming it to a permanent constraint.
You do not need to become a mirror image of capitalism to fight capitalism, which runs on a self-destructive power. Capitalism has not stood the test of time on any substantial time scale.
The maximalist control ambition, whether it’s Kardashev or the Dark Forest model, is a road to ruin.
I never advocated to mirror capitalism. I’m advocating for the collective control of the means of development and production which would include AI. That is the dictatorship of the proletariat.
Once obtained it’s up to us as a class how to develop these technologies to our benefit or cease production altogether, but you need the dictatorship either way.