2 ms·

This is actually a solid comment because ideally it would be the case. I think it's the opposite though. The problem with LLMs is they are marketed not as a col

This is actually a solid comment because ideally it would be the case. I think it's the opposite though. The problem with LLMs is they are marketed not as a collective achievement. They are at their heart a tool which should belong to collective humanity. We should all be getting dividends from them and they should be collectively owned. But instead we're seeing them explicitly marketed as tools for capital centralization. Of course no one sees it as a collective achievement when the announcements are aimed at either scaring people about how even the team behind them is worried about releasing it or for CEOs to replace workers. Artemis II, at least in the states, was an example of people genuinely feeling collective achievement. There is absolutely no reason this AI moment couldn't be that. Instead though the companies involved have explicitly chosen fear and capital as their marketing tools. We should be seeing this as an incredible time but those involved do not want us to and plan to keep the spoils for themselves so we shouldn't.

solenoid0937 5mo ago
Throughout history, automation has rarely been "marketed" as a collective achievement. That doesn't make it not one. > But instead we're seeing them explicitly marketed as tools for capital centralization. And labor automation, which is the single most valuable thing any technology can do. But if your answer is "kill the technology" instead of "structure society to live with it," of course you will experience pain.
- surgical_fire 5mo ago
  Zyklon B was also fundamentally an automation of labor. Technology is value neutral. What you call cynicism is actually people thinking more critically about technology. Technology is not a fundamental good. It can be detrimental and destructive. It can be used to oppress, to kill, to harm. Approaching this following a "we can fix things later" stance is horribly reductive and misguided. You spoke of History in other replies. History is littered with technological advancements that caused immeasurable harm to society.
  - solenoid0937 5mo ago
    Your mistake is that you think I am taking the generic stance of "technology is good" when in fact I am taking the stance that automating labor is good. AI is a general tool to automate labor. Won't even engage with the comparison to Zyklon B.
    - surgical_fire 5mo ago
      Of course you won't. In fact, you didn't engage with any argument beyond the emptiest of platitudes.
- roxolotl 5mo ago
  In addition to the lack of value neutrality mentioned in other comments one major issue is no one is optimistic about AI. Structuring society to live with it is an option but no one is offering even glimpses of what a structure might look like outside of shrugging and saying "maybe ubi?" There's always been the positive and negative sides of technology. The major reason the pessimism is so strong in this case is because even the technologists involved aren't optimistic. I'm not saying that propaganda is good but with nuclear we things like "My Friend the Atom." What we now call Retrofuturism promised a wonder future while the nuclear arms race was running away in the background threatening total annihilation. Nuclear was also going to automate labor all power sources do but many people were thrilled by the future being presented. The only future people see today is something like Cyberpunk which is a pessimistic and cautionary look at the future. You cannot lament the lack of optimism around a technology when there is simply no optimistic future being presented. Maybe it's a result of deeply ingrained cultural cynicism but the fact that even those pushing the technology only have pessimistic future views make it incredibly challenging to be optimistic. If those involved cannot even offer optimism then I don't know why anyone would expect optimism from the common man.
archagon 5mo ago
> We should all be getting dividends from them and they should be collectively owned. But instead we're seeing them explicitly marketed as tools for capital centralization. Well-said. You'll notice that people with jobs that are on paper most synergetic with LLM use, such as folks in the C-suite[1], are not worried at all. Why? Because they are part of the owner class and are not at risk of getting replaced. To them, it's all upside: a chance to put their feet up on the table a bit more often. Would be nice if that also applied to the rest of us. [1] "Mark Zuckerberg Is Building an AI Agent to Help Him Be CEO" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47491355 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47491355

solenoid0937 5mo ago

Throughout history, automation has rarely been "marketed" as a collective achievement. That doesn't make it not one. > But instead we're seeing them explicitly marketed as tools for capital centralization. And labor automation, which is the single most valuable thing any technology can do. But if your answer is "kill the technology" instead of "structure society to live with it," of course you will experience pain.

surgical_fire 5mo ago
Zyklon B was also fundamentally an automation of labor. Technology is value neutral. What you call cynicism is actually people thinking more critically about technology. Technology is not a fundamental good. It can be detrimental and destructive. It can be used to oppress, to kill, to harm. Approaching this following a "we can fix things later" stance is horribly reductive and misguided. You spoke of History in other replies. History is littered with technological advancements that caused immeasurable harm to society.
- solenoid0937 5mo ago
  Your mistake is that you think I am taking the generic stance of "technology is good" when in fact I am taking the stance that automating labor is good. AI is a general tool to automate labor. Won't even engage with the comparison to Zyklon B.
  - surgical_fire 5mo ago
    Of course you won't. In fact, you didn't engage with any argument beyond the emptiest of platitudes.
roxolotl 5mo ago
In addition to the lack of value neutrality mentioned in other comments one major issue is no one is optimistic about AI. Structuring society to live with it is an option but no one is offering even glimpses of what a structure might look like outside of shrugging and saying "maybe ubi?" There's always been the positive and negative sides of technology. The major reason the pessimism is so strong in this case is because even the technologists involved aren't optimistic. I'm not saying that propaganda is good but with nuclear we things like "My Friend the Atom." What we now call Retrofuturism promised a wonder future while the nuclear arms race was running away in the background threatening total annihilation. Nuclear was also going to automate labor all power sources do but many people were thrilled by the future being presented. The only future people see today is something like Cyberpunk which is a pessimistic and cautionary look at the future. You cannot lament the lack of optimism around a technology when there is simply no optimistic future being presented. Maybe it's a result of deeply ingrained cultural cynicism but the fact that even those pushing the technology only have pessimistic future views make it incredibly challenging to be optimistic. If those involved cannot even offer optimism then I don't know why anyone would expect optimism from the common man.

archagon 5mo ago

> We should all be getting dividends from them and they should be collectively owned. But instead we're seeing them explicitly marketed as tools for capital centralization. Well-said. You'll notice that people with jobs that are on paper most synergetic with LLM use, such as folks in the C-suite[1], are not worried at all. Why? Because they are part of the owner class and are not at risk of getting replaced. To them, it's all upside: a chance to put their feet up on the table a bit more often. Would be nice if that also applied to the rest of us. [1] "Mark Zuckerberg Is Building an AI Agent to Help Him Be CEO" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47491355 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47491355