AI should be owned collectively and we should all benefit from the loss of jobs. It was trained on our data and has no value without our labor, so it is our rightful property.
I don't know why people voted for this. Probably something to do with all the big tech CEOs visibly paying bribes and tribute to the corrupt and massively unpopular president. I doubt the anti-data-center backlash is as extreme without that.
But also just NIMBY. No one likes to live near industry.
To get this big a backlash, you need a variety of reasons to oppose that appeal to a broad coalition of voters. Inevitably some of those reasons will be silly (a lot of people talked themselves into voting for a 2nd term for Trump, after all!).
"No sooner had Everet in 1758 erected the first wool-shearing machine that was driven by water-power, than it was set on fire by 100,000 people who had been thrown out of work. Fifty thousand workpeople, who had previously lived by carding wool, petitioned Parliament against Arkwright’s scribbling mills and carding engines. The enormous destruction of machinery that occurred in the English manufacturing districts during the first 15 years of this century, chiefly caused by the employment of the power-loom, and known as the Luddite movement, gave the anti-Jacobin governments of a Sidmouth, a Castlereagh, and the like, a pretext for the most reactionary and forcible measures. It took both time and experience before the workpeople learnt to distinguish between machinery and its employment by capital, and to direct their attacks, not against the material instruments of production, but against the mode in which they are used."
— Karl Marx, Capital, Volume I (1867), Part IV, Ch. 15, Section 5: “The Strife Between Workman and Machine”
Replacing human jobs should be the dream of all people. You want humans doing drudgery when it could be automated by machines? Why?
> And as I have mentioned the word labour, I cannot help saying that a great deal of nonsense is being written and talked nowadays about the dignity of manual labour. There is nothing necessarily dignified about manual labour at all, and most of it is absolutely degrading. It is mentally and morally injurious to man to do anything in which he does not find pleasure, and many forms of labour are quite pleasureless activities, and should be regarded as such. To sweep a slushy crossing for eight hours, on a day when the east wind is blowing is a disgusting occupation. To sweep it with mental, moral, or physical dignity seems to me to be impossible. To sweep it with joy would be appalling. Man is made for something better than disturbing dirt. All work of that kind should be done by a machine.
— Oscar Wilde, “The Soul of Man Under Socialism,” Fortnightly Review, February 1891
That would be true under a good economic system. Instead we have a system where the benefits are reaped by the few, and the masses get to either work or starve. Taking away the "work" option is, needless to say, offensive to those.
This is explicitly about manual labor. The things on the verge of being automated are precisely not in the "sweeping a slushy crossing" category. If Wilde was here to see the things the slop-peddlers are calling art, he'd be distraught.
Yea thats fine but you think they will distribute the wealth to you in particular?
i mentioned it in my comment too
> Maybe they should ask you how exactly do you plan to feed your family once all the jobs are gone and only ppl who have any say are data center owners.
i am not conviced that markzuckerberg stays up all night building datacenters so he can pass on that wealth to you.
> I cannot help saying that a great deal of nonsense is being written and talked nowadays about the dignity of manual labour. There is nothing necessarily dignified about manual labour at all, and most of it is absolutely degrading
That's unfortunate, as manual labor will be the only thing left if AI companies have their way.
No no it's really important that I have 5-factor authentication on every website and it requires me to go through the whole login process again every time I break eye contact.
And if it ever detects that you briefly used a browser with any kind of privacy-preserving features on any website, you will be logged out from all devices and forced to revalidate your email and gene sequences.
Discord does this with Firefox: It doesn't even tell you that a captcha failed or anything, just poof logged out and you must re reverify the same email you verified 10 minutes ago.
Downvote me if you want but I am dead serious. Attaching profit motives to basic infrastructure is why the USA is a dystopia today. Protocols really are better than platforms. IRC was a better system than discord.
We have been a petri dish for insane megalomaniacs for too long, and now freedom is coming back to bite us, because it gave freedom to the worst imaginable people to oppress the rest of us.
IRC didn't and hasn't meaningfully evolved the features Discord has, which is why people use Discord.
You're getting downvoted probably because it isn't a serious suggestion. IRC is missing features and you don't have a meaningful reason to make it illegal.
> Attaching profit motives to basic infrastructure
Water, food, housing, healthcare, telecommunications, computing (including artificial intelligence). I guess it's "socialist" to believe that these baseline needs should be, and can be, free for all of humanity.
One day we'll look back and laugh at the stupidity of our current state of civilization, that we'd need to pay anybody anything to live on this planet that provides all those things and more for free. Pity us, future people, I hope we grow up soon.
> planet that provides all those things and more for free
This planet does not provide healthcare, telecommunications, or computing for free (unless you consider nature's "the sick get eaten" approach "healthcare"). Housing is only free if you either don't value the labor or you are fine living in caves. Water and food could be free if you're only interested in drinking from rivers and foraging for fruit, otherwise we're back to whether or not you value the labor in farming or building the infrastructure for water collection and transport.
(for the record, I think those things should be all funded by taxes. I just think it is silly to claim the planet provides those things for free. We created those things, through millennia of toil.)
and yet somehow an attacker never needs all these auth methods.
my boyfriend didn't have 2fa enabled, but google would still ask him to verify a code on his phone.
recently his password leaked, the hackers got into the account and google never bothered them with an extra verification. amazing. the fact that they signed in from a completely different country? who cares!
reply