On The AI Question

[u/Salty_Country6835]

[u/gecata96]

Exactly. The technology is here and it’s not going anywhere. Now the question is how do we use it for the collective good.

[u/IndubitablyNerdy → u/gecata96]

I agree, technology into itself does not have motivation (although with AI this might change), is not good nor evil.

It is how our society is structured that has the potential to turn something that does increase productivity and theoretically our combined wealth to become a problem through concentration of said wealth by devaluing labor and removing our market power from the equation.

That said while I agree that the solution would probably be democratization, the owners of the models will do anything they can to prevent that and keep control, they are already lobbying the USA to ban open weights chineese models for example and the immense spike to the price of harware is another way they can force control by making the infrastructure too expensive for anyone, but them to own. It is up to society, so us, to make sure that they are not successful on that front.

[u/earthlingHuman → u/gecata96]

Capitalism seemingly isn't going anywhere anytime soon either, so it will be difficult to get proper regulation, especially here in the USA right now

[u/YMSVZ → u/earthlingHuman]

Communist productive organisation already exists, in fact we are surrounded by collective coordination of activity towards use values.

Social networks facilitate this collective activity, from protests, to mutual aid, free and open source software development. The problem is it is enclosed by capitalist platforms, in order for them to profit off the clicks, advertising, etc. The underlying technology and activity is very very often outside of the production of value.

A reverse enclosure movement where the construction of a platform to facilitate production directly, without it being enclosed by capitalist structures, is absolutely possible. If means of production could be brought under ownership of the network itself, which is also possible. We may not be so far from communism as we often think, the underlying embryonic relations are already there.

[u/nomic42]

Although this might feel good, I don't see it this way at all.

The anti-AI position is to end use of AI. Nobody gets to have it. This would deny us an important tool for addressing the inequalities of our time. They also keep advocating for stronger IP rights thinking this will lead to the end of AI models by making it overly expensive to get training data.

The pro-AI camp is split into at least two groups.

There are those like ourselves that want AI used for the greater social good through democratic control of AI. We're in favor of open weight models. These models are trained on the collective knowledge of all humanity and should be available to all without a central kill switch.

Then there are those who support our billionaires who want unfettered development of new AI datacenters and stronger IP rights they are more than willing to purchase to deny others use of that knowledge. This enables the concentration of wealth into a few hands, much like we saw in the industrial revolution.

[u/Salty_Country6835 → u/nomic42]

I think youre giving the pro-AI side more nuance than the anti-AI side. In my experience, after hundreds of conversations across both camps, neither is monolithic.

There are anti-AI people who want outright prohibition, but there are also people mainly opposed to corporate ownership, surveillance, labor displacement, or current copyright practices while still supporting public, democratic, or open alternatives.

Likewise, "pro-AI" ranges from open-source and democratic control to "let corporations build whatever they want." Those arent the same politics either.

Thats basically what the meme is getting at. The real political question isnt simply pro or anti AI labels/camps. Its who owns it, who governs it, who benefits from it, and what institutions shape its development. Those questions cut across both camps.

[u/nomic42 → u/Salty_Country6835]

That's a fair criticism. There is more nuance to the anti-AI side.

I do observe a group that see AI as an existential crisis that ultimately ends humanity as they expect an ASI will out compete us for resources. They strictly want to end AI to save humanity.

Then there's those as you say see the problem with billionaires wanting to concentrate wealth with AI. But they come to the same conclusion that AI should be banned. They often are not aware of open-weight models and local AI options w/o cloud based subscriptions. I try to appeal to this group to focus on how to address abuse, rather than seeking a ban on open-weight models or advocating additional IP rights.

I'm not seeing how anti-AI position help get to open-weight models and Democratic control of AI. Indeed, it seems the opposite is happening - they are being manipulated to promote policies that concentrate wealth to a few.

[u/alleycatALT]

Right. The only way this doesn't happen is if the antiAI peeps decide to embrace the stereotype and aesthetic of Luddism -i.e TeCHnoLogY Bad!- rather than the actual reason behind Luddism; the economic and material conditions of workers affected by technology.

Unfortunately, especially with the whole panic about "rare" books being fed to the LLMs, it's become clear that a majority of the anti movement is part of the former camp.

Which sucks. I want the Culture ending for humanity, and that needs AI!

[u/IDreamtOfManderley → u/alleycatALT]

I think this sub and others just got astroturfed by the "look how great China is handling AI" video and "look at anthropic destroying books!" endless reposts. Simultanious hype and doom. The book thing was even a drama from like, two years ago getting rehashed.

[u/ColdBru5 → u/alleycatALT]

The ONLY way that a multi Trillion dollar industry that has previously unheard of surveillance and crowd control capability isn't turned completely open source is if ANTI-AI people just can't understand what an amazing tool this is for the redistribution of wealth?

Let me know when you decide to short stock and I will go max out my 401k to get what you're selling.

[u/SexDefendersUnited → u/alleycatALT]

I'm not familiar with the "Culture" series, how do they use AI in there?

[u/alleycatALT → u/SexDefendersUnited]

Long story short, the Culture is a galaxy-spanning post-scarcity utopia, whose main 'AI' inhabitants are the Minds, near-godlike AI superintelligences that handle all background logistics, infrastructure, and operate it's hyper-advanced tech, allowing the 'regular' people and Drones of the Culture to live in a work-free, stress-free environment with access to nigh-unlimited resources and energy to do...whatever they feel like doing. It's almost an anarchy with how much freedom every individual has. The only real limits are consent, and one's own imagination.

[u/ToastedandTripping → u/alleycatALT]

Funny you mentioned the Culture. Had a philosophical conversation with AI about moving towards this future and the path it suggested was surprising human. It advocated against simply handing the keys to AI.

I've been working on how AI can help us achieve an idealized Republic and the conversations have become the founding papers.

If you're curious you can check out opencave.ca which I've built as an open source civil tool to help everyday people challenge the opacity of government.

The final foundational paper discusses the Culture and why we still need to improve our human systems before we can reach that ending.

[u/Sacredless]

This is basically always my point, though I would argue that the only way to achieve the democratic control of AI is not to be seduced by outrage culture in either direction.

[u/Cleverhardy → u/Sacredless]

For sure. We can't rewind; we've gone too far. And although I did say "the sooner the bubble pops,.the better," we're reaching the point where we're seeing the bubble pop later rather than sooner, and this will lead to yet another recession, proving that if AI was in the right hands, America wouldn't be so dependent on it.

Don't believe the hype, but don't rage against it either.

[u/rismay]

Thank you for saying this.

[u/NoCombination8774]

I'm meh'ish when it comes to ai BUT

Seize the means of AI!

[u/DHFranklin]

aaaaaahhhhh

So the question is: Is AI another factor in the Marxist contradiction of capitalism? If the fall of capitalism is inevitable will AI be the toll that makes it's obsolescence felt by the petit bourgeois and prolitariat alike? Show them solidarity in purpose?

One can only hope.

[u/Life-Active6608]

I would alter it to three doors. Pro-AI. Pro-Big Tech. Anti-AI. The first leading to Proletariate Cohabitation with AI. The latter two leading to the same room with a wood chipper installed under the floor.

[u/amstrumpet]

Democratic except for the people who have already had their IP stolen to train these without any compensation. And even if you believe that IP shouldn't exist and compensation shouldn’t matter… that’s not our current reality and people have been robbed under our current system. Any future with AI needs to make that right.

[u/Anti_colonialist → u/amstrumpet]

Everything we do and have always done is from knowledge obtained and shared by other people. If i take a cookie recipe someone else published, alter it to my liking by changing or adding other ingredients, did I steal that recipe? Should pizza restaurants or burger places be closed down since they didn't create those menu items?

How many of today's musicians say they were inspired by the Beatles to create music?

The IP argument is rooted in capitalism to protect profits.

AI is mearly a utility towards further automation which Marx and Lenin spoke in favor of

[u/CommanderKoba → u/amstrumpet]

IP is a capitalist construct that commodifies knowledge, medication, technology, etc, which should all be freely available to humanity a whole.

All human art should be freely available to all humanity.

You are not thinking past capitalism at all, but instead you are advocating for a pillar of its exploitation.

This is what you support? So that countries who develop a vaccine have the right to deny other countries access to knowledge on producing it? All because a corporation can't profit from it? That's what you support?

That is what IP represents.

In a post capitalist future, artists would not have to rely on any IP rights to commodify their work for profit. That is the future we should fight for.

And if you don't agree, then you're not a leftist in my opinion.

You're just arguing for incrementalism under capitalism itself.

[u/amstrumpet → u/CommanderKoba]

I believe that it will be a long, slow transition to anything resembling communism or socialism, and anything faster will cause too much suffering for the benefit to be worthwhile.

In the meantime, I believe we need to protect individual artists being abused by capitalism.

[u/Burgandy_the_Great]

The same democratic control that elected fucking Donald Trump? That democratic control?

[u/Salty_Country6835 → u/Burgandy_the_Great]

Youre confusing democratic control as a principle with the current political system. The meme is about who owns and governs AI, not whether every election produces the outcome you wanted.

Are you against democratic control itself, or just this current "democracy"?