• blargle@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    all ^only

    Also; the reason why it’s easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism is that ending the world actually is easier than ending capitalism.

      • zerakith@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        16 days ago

        They don’t disappear if capitalism disappears. I agree with you capitalism needs to end in order to deal with them but there are hard issues that we have to deal with even with capitalism gone.

        Even if the causes ceased we would still be left with residual emissions and degraded natural systems to try and deal with and a lower EROI society to do it.

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 days ago

          They’re “hard issues” because we don’t have a centrally planned economy, we have to rely on the market to provide solutions.

          Through a combination of marshaling the forces of production to build a renewable infrastructure and strict fossil fuel rationing during the build-up phase I think we could get the crisis under control within 5 years.

          … I’ll admit that’s just vibes, though.

          • RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            16 days ago

            They’re “hard issues” because we don’t have a centrally planned economy, we have to rely on the market to provide solutions

            As humans are very bad a predicting the future, centrally planned economies come with so many added problems that market based solutions are frequently more realistic.

            • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              16 days ago

              Every corporation is centrally planned.

              I recommend reading The People’s Republic of Walmart. Businesses have figured out central planning, there’s no reason it can’t be done for nations.

                • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  16 days ago

                  Walmart isn’t a federation, it’s very centrally planned. It’s also larger than a lot of nations.

                  The only thing missing is a military.

          • zerakith@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            16 days ago

            I get the sentiment and I wish it were true.

            Some of the issues stem from material and energy limitations regardless of human organisation structures. Fossil Fuels are stored sunlight over a long period of time that means that burning them has a high yield and that’s given us a very high EROI society (one where there’s an abundance of energy for purposes that aren’t basic functioning).

            I recommend reading The Collapse of Complex Societies by Tainter who discussing the energy limitations of society. Its before our understanding of energy limitations of technology and he’s by no means a leftist but it is still a good introductory text to it.

      • RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        16 days ago

        The Aral Sea is essentially gone and it was killed by poor Soviet planning. Capitalism was not the driving factor rather ignorance was and ignorance is held equally by all sides.

        Capitalism isn’t the only thing driving environmental collapse. It’s industrialization

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          16 days ago

          Central planners in the Soviet Union didn’t even have computers and they lacked the level of scientific understanding we have today of the environment, of our resources, and of the limits to growth. We’ve all heard about Mao killing the sparrows in China.

          This isn’t a reason to never try central planning again.

        • deaf_fish@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          15 days ago

          Industrialization to make money is encouraged by capitalism. Why do you think big oil was lying about global warming? It’s not a few bad apples it is a systemic drive to make more money even if it hurts people or the planet.

          • RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            15 days ago

            Industrialization has been done by every nation that is capable of doing it regardless of their economic system or philosophy.

            Thinking this is a capitalist issue ignores the Marxist states that have horrible records on the environment eg China and the USSR. It’s industrialization that is the issue.

            • deaf_fish@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              15 days ago

              There’s a difference between industrialization for people and trade versus industrialization for money and power. One helps everyone, The other only helps capitalists.

              I wouldn’t necessarily look at China and USSR and say they are a good alternative. I prefer a more democratic socialism. My problem with capitalism is specifically the lack of choice of the people. We spend 8 out of 12 hours on average working for a company that we don’t get a vote in.

              • RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                15 days ago

                There’s a difference between industrialization for people and trade versus industrialization for money and power.

                Not as far as the environment is concerned and frankly many will tell you running water and electricity are huge advantages regardless of how you get them.

                • deaf_fish@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  15 days ago

                  What? Yes, the environment can tell because there would be less pollution. The motivations are different. Do you think worker controlled industries would use the same tactics to over produce and polute the areas the workers live in? No one would benefit from that.

                  I’m not saying we would reach zero pollution but there would be a lot less pollution.

                  I have no problem with running water and electricity, most reasonable socialist would agree.

      • zerakith@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        16 days ago

        To be honest I’m tempted to say that desire to remove humans from the production of society is a fundamentally capitalist one.

        • RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 days ago

          While that might be true in some contexts it makes no sense in the context of my comment.

          Im saying that leftist coders inherent personal problems and racism will make their way into the AI much like how it has worked with capitalist AI.

          Humans have many of the same biases and issues regardless of political lean.

          • LwL@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            16 days ago

            It’s less of a bias of the programmer and moreso a bias of data, particularly when a factor like gender or ethnicity correlates with something without direct causation, such as crime rates correlating with ethnicity largely because of immigrants being poorer on average, and economic standing being a major correlating factor. If your dataset doesn’t include that, any AI will just see “oh, people in group x are way more likely to commit crimes”. This can be prevented but it’s generally more of a risk of overlooking something than intentional data manipulation (not that that isn’t possible).

          • zerakith@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            16 days ago

            Yes that’s fair. I guess my comment wasn’t a direct response to yours other than it made me think this desire that all the difficult issues (like bias) just disappear if you remove all the humans from the process* is flawed and any anticapitalist society should really start from that understanding. One that understands that conflict will emerge and pro-social “convivial” systems and structures need to emerge to handle them.

            *You are right to point out that the “AI” we are talking about is statistical models built from humans that includes bias where as the hype is that we have Data from Star Trek and therefore these systems hide the human inputs but don’t remove them.

  • agent_nycto@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    15 days ago

    Completely untrue.

    The environmental impact would still be as bad, it would still spout out misinformation, it would still scrape for art against people’s will, the images would still be shit and not art anyway, and would still make an intellectual sinkhole.

  • seeigel@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    16 days ago

    Companies are the original AI. They turn humans into a machine that does whatever the owner wants. Kind of like the dreaming humans in the Matrix movie.

  • Zizzy@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    16 days ago

    I really disagree with this meme. For just one example, capitalism isnt why people are using ai to generate nudes of unwilling people and children. Without capitalism I do very much doubt AI would be where it is right now, but the cats out of the bag and it isnt going away if we didnt have capitalism.

    • Angry_Autist (he/him)@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      16 days ago

      People generating porn, no matter how abhorrent, is one of the LEAST problems with AI, but the fact that you are stuck on it is very telling

      edit: you have no idea how bad AI is already fucking up your life and it has nothing to do with prompt art

        • Zizzy@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          16 days ago

          Yeah lol, I just gave one quick example of something I felt was indisputably not tied to capitalism. But apparently I’m stuck on it and the only problem I have is with it generating porn? Wild way to read my post, and entirely untrue.

  • andros_rex@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    Problem is that AI is going to be used to make it harder to overthrow capitalism. It’d be interesting to see the uses of AI in a world where it wasn’t being used to chip away at some of the last occupations where talent and skill mean anything.

    • Asafum@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      16 days ago

      It’s also going to be used to eliminate positions where “talent” and “skill” aren’t required, which is where a gigantic portion of a lot of countries populations work.

      When ownership decides “I own the AI that run the factory and the AI inside the Robots that perform all the physical tasks in the factory, so why the fuck should any of my profit go to pay parasites on society?” that’s when we get into the “let them all starve” portion of capitalism…

    • Wilzax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      16 days ago

      Machine Learning is especially useful for many different kinds of research as an advanced mode of statistical analysis.

      Text and image generation is not especially useful in any field other than to cut corners on paying human artists and writers and programmers to do the job properly.

      • andros_rex@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        16 days ago

        Text and image generation are the ones that upset me. C-suite types (and their pettier, aspirational counterparts) don’t care about “art” - why publish a few good novels that you have to pay royalties on, when you can generate thousands? Even if they’re shit, there was zero effort on your part.

        If you lack aesthetic appreciation - why would you bother hiring an artist for anything?

        The wealthy of this era don’t seem to value art. Midjourney can make Kinkade knock offs faster than even Kinkade himself could. There’s not room in their world for Twombly’s and Motherwell’s - except perhaps as investment schemes.

      • zout@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        16 days ago

        Unpopular opinion: The only complaints I’ve read about AI taking someone’s job so far were from freelance writers who wrote for clickbait sites, or other artists doing very generic work.

        • andros_rex@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          16 days ago

          I am terrified of the impact on education. With the DOE likely to be dismantled, public education is probably going to be AI garbage. Teachers don’t need to be qualified for the subjects they teach. It’s being heavily pushed by administrators as a way to deal with ever increasing class sizes and SPED case loads. (God, if Kamala had been elected, I was going to be on the war path for a fed investigation into SPED compliance in my state…)

          They made the working conditions for teachers hell, to drive us out of the profession. Online schools don’t require building overhead, they allow so many options for scamming the system (AI generated essays in response to AI generated homework assignments.)

          I am worried that the future for all children who cannot afford a private education will be AI generated content delivered via a screen either at home or in a mass classroom overseen by a babysitter.

          It’s an attack on knowledge and expertise. It’s “knowledge has no value, reality has no value, it’s who has control over the model.”

  • Comtief@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    sure lets just get rid of capitalism as a whole, lets see where that lands us

  • Ogmios@sh.itjust.worksM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    Uh… that’s just plain wrong. Everyone who seeks power (read: all governments) will abuse this technology the exact same way they’ve abused every other technology which came before it.

      • Ogmios@sh.itjust.worksM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        16 days ago

        People are going to have to work one hell of a lot harder than they currently are if that’s to be achieved. Real jobs too, not just streaming and onlyfans.

        • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 days ago

          You got it backwards. The state is the violent force behind capitalist coercion. WIthout the state and its capitalism there’s no need to waste your life serving capital.

          • Ogmios@sh.itjust.worksM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            16 days ago

            Who said anything about capital? You’re going to need to do real work, directly involved with the real world, to create much of the things you will need to survive daily life.

            • Asafum@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              16 days ago

              What does this mean?

              Without capital you can’t get land to do any of the things you need to survive. If everything is run by AI + robotics and someone owns the AI and robots then there’s no way to acquire capital to buy land to utilize for your survival.

              • Ogmios@sh.itjust.worksM
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                16 days ago

                My guy. If there’s no government then you can just settle anywhere you please. You don’t have to pay anyone an ounce of copper.

                Might have to kill off some other people with different ideas though.

                • Asswardbackaddict@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  7 days ago

                  You really should catch up with the rest of us on leftist ideology. Also, realize that the scary picture in your head with no government is exactly the world we live in, today, while the government simply wages wars for corporations and keeps itself intact by commodifying human behavior.

  • smokingpistol@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    15 days ago

    Capitalism is not perfect but it’s better than any of the bullshit that’s out there. How many Full communist countries have ever worked? Even the countries that are socialist countries such as Vietnam have an open market. So any doofus that believes That 100% communist or socialist country would be better than what we live in today have no idea how things work and our fucking buffoons