His argument was literally that
- artists, writers, and programmers are “labor aristocracy” and deserve no respect because they’re sitting around making art and writing code while other people are toiling and laboring,
- genAI is a “free resource” (“it’s free for me to use at work”) that “helps everyone make things” instead of having to rely on skill and expertise and therefore makes everything equal,
- it’s hypocritical of people to be worried about the environmental and societal impact of genAI because “only white people are worried about it now that their hobbies are being threatened and everyone else is catching up”.
Pointing out there there are artists and programmers from every race and economic class, as well as perfectly ordinary people in every walk of life who are all actively being harmed both by the theft of ideas and labor and by the physical effects of gigantic data centers ruining communities, was met with much hand-waving and incredibly impenetrable philosophical jargon.
I’m particularly incensed because I’m as leftist and anticapitalist as they come and this felt like the fuckery some conservative cockwomble would try to come up with to parody socialism, except this guy was completely serious.
People who argue in favor of AI art are, at best, talentless hacks.
genAI is a “free resource” (“it’s free for me to use at work”)
i.e. literally not free, it’s capital the boss allows him to use while on the clock while he works for a wage.
I can entertain a good faith argument that being able to make art while other toil is privilege.
There is no good faith argument that using the plagiarism machine is socialistic, or that it’s anything but privilege as well. You are making “art” while the actual artist toils at their craft
There is no good faith argument that using the plagiarism machine is socialistic
Nailed it.
Debating with a conservative is like playing chess with a pigeon. They just knock over all the pieces, shit all over the board and strut around like they won.
That’s the thing! This guy actually is a very involved leftist, complete with theory and everything…and then he goes on to say this
They sound like a tankie. Tankies are leftists like Dr. Pepper is a medical doctor
I got the reference! Guessing you’re Canadian?
I wish!
His argument was literally that
don’t bother, the “texts” are called bad faith.
https://kbin.earth/m/[email protected]/t/2998356
Ask him the question, what does he contribute to such a society as he envisions this AI will bring? And how does such a system combat the need for more data while destroying the means to get more clean data for the data set?
This falls apart for me specifically because Generative AI isn’t a closed loop system and it’s use.of “shared ideas” is by force or by deception, which doesn’t make sense in a socialist or communist society.
Wait, I thought socialist communities were KNOWN for forcing people who greedily horde to share?
That raises additional questions. In a post scarcity communist or socialist society, people would make things (art etc) not because they need to but because they want to. I have no doubt that they would likely continue to make things. But I don’t think that will be enough in the face of people who want to take the shortcut because it is easier.
So, then comes the problem. Why make art if the machine can just do it for you? Who makes the new art (that is labor intensive) when there is already a tool for that that doesn’t involve labor? Who trains the people to do the art? Who teaches them? Where does that skill get developed? The AI cannot continue to improve without new (untainted data and at some point that data will no longer be produced).
It’s the same with a lot of stuff throughout time. There’s a place in I think Indiana that makes tanks still not because the US needs them (there’s a significant surplus and they don’t really have anything to do with them once they are made). But they make them so that the process of making them and the ability to make them doesn’t get lost to time. That happens every time we invent a tool that does the job for us so that a layman can do it.
You can’t use what you don’t develope. How do we continue to developed things after AI is there to do it all for us?
Art is Imperialist.
- My ass it is. Giving any degree of power to the commoners, which is what art does, is anti-Imperialist if anything. If anything, AI, which is actively taking power away from the commoners, is the Imperialist thing.
The art that AI creates is imperialist through capitalism. The only people that use AI art are the ones trying to sell you something. Either it’s a view or a product. Most real artist understand that AI can’t create, it can only emulate.
So is mental gymnast a bourgeois or proletariat form of labor?
Ah yes, aristocracy. That’s why artists and writers are known for being loaded.
Those fucking AI ghouls believe the technology “liberates” the commoner from the supposed “elitism” and “gatekeeping” of the arts and some sciences by means of stealing the technique and style of creatives. They also happen to be parroting Hitlerian talking points, as it happened Hitler was a frustrated failed painter.
Nothing like arguing socialism and imperialism with people who don’t know what either of those words mean.
AI is built on the unprecedented theft and exploitation of the intellectual labor of the creative working class by greedy capitalists.
Literally the definition of stealing the surplus value
I’ve talked with someone that argued that the concept of intellectual property is inherently capitalist, and therefore it taking the art and other works of people doesn’t matter in the grand scheme.
And I guess I see the point. I don’t agree with it, but I can’t argue that well against it.
That is logical equivalent to saying that because property is a capitalist concept theft is a form of socialism.
So the robber barons are actually socialists too, and wage theft isn’t theft because money shouldn’t exist, and if you can steal candy from a baby that’s ok because ownership doesn’t exist and only the strong survive. Delusional people can justify anything.
It’s pretty twisted, especially when you consider the players involved, as well as who is being exploited, and who is benefitting from AI the most.
Even the top brass within Microsoft are quoted as having said that what they’re doing is the “largest theft of labor in history”, and I tend to agree.
After all, the richest men on Earth are getting richer at the expense of the artist, the thinker, the writer and all forms of intellectual and physical labor. Profit may be theft, but theft is also still theft.
This is like saying we don’t need to pay a minimum wage now because under communism each will be provided according to their needs.
IP is a necessary evil under the current system to stop distributors like Instagram, tiktok, or AI companies from taking labor from workers (artists, writers, etc.) without compensation.
IP is a necessary evil under the current system to stop distributors like Instagram, tiktok, or AI companies from taking labor from workers (artists, writers, etc.) without compensation.
Seemingly this did not work.
Almost like rules dont apply for the ruling class and the whole IP spiel is just, as pointed out, completely and utterly capitalist.
And to think that IP laws would prevent the rich from thieving is hilariously naive.
It’s literally a bias distribution device, owned by the wealthiest capitalists to have ever walked the earth
GenAI is anathema to socialism
AI…at least how it’s currently being deployed and marketed…is the ultimate expression of Capitalism. They are stealing the labor of others, and leasing it back to the public, for endless profit…all while destroying the environment and undermining the working class.
OP got trolled.
If AI really was a free resource, then maybe that part almost makes sense. It’s losing billions per quarter, it’s not free.
“helps everyone make things” instead of having to rely on skill and expertise and therefore makes everything equal,
everyone else is catching up”.
In both of these statements it sounds like they’re saying, “the AI is smarter than me, and I’m stupid without it.”
The open models in good inference engines can be dirt cheap, but that’s not a good argument because (among other reasons) it’s not the bulk of what is used.
Least insane tankie.
