There’s nothing Marxist in that article. Only fallacies from rich white man ranting about people pushing back against fascism.
People say AI to mean LLM first because main stream western, fascist, media pushed the term by inviting exclusively non-expert and CEOs to talk about the subject. People are pushing back against a product that is mean to make workers dull and replace them by stealing their works even by capitalist standards -> exploiting their works, appropriating it to themselves without any compensation nor permission.
The article tried to paint the discussion as anti-llm would be anti technology, which is not Marxist in any way and not relevant. Weirdly enough fascist guy like the one on this article don’t talk about cryptocurrency as something we should chill for. Isn’t it a tool too?
Current LLM chill is the opposite of dialectical materialism: what is the concrete analysis here? LLM outputed nothing of value for years despite the hundred of billions invested. Worst it actually participate to global warming, bourgeoisie attempt to mass control, getting rid of workers and inflating computer costs. So the real consequences for people are losses only.
And for what? To get to have unskilled rich white people who can afford the awfully hight price of LLM to boats about “I made this” while it is actually made from steal and empoverish people and enriching tech lord’s.
So no, thanks, and trying to paint fallacies to Marxism isn’t going to help either.
EDIT: replace the “stealing” argument as pointed out -> https://lemmy.ml/post/54102413/28384201 , this can be confusing with the anti-piracy propaganda vocabulary.
Actually let me analyze again your comment here: I thought you were right at first but thinking about it not really.
First let me address : I didn’t know about RIAA, this kind of paternalistic way of addressing people is not good in any way. We aren’t all USA-centric (like you?).
Then about the “steal” argument:
it is a vocabulary used for century by Marxist organizations about the value taken by the bourgeoisie from the proletariat work.
the argument of “copying is OK” is missing the point : any FOSS dev/organization I know would gladly give their work to you, individual. But not to big tech to commercialize it and make extreme amount of money, as well as steering conversation towards fascism in the process. While also having an amazingly big impact on the environment.
“both have it afterwards” is also a fallacy : any work done on computer can be seen like this : if your an accountant and you boss copy your accounting sheets and do not pay you, it is not stealing? You both have the file, for you it won’t make you any money, he will. Big tech taking FOSS code for their profit is not piracy as of individual accessing cultural product they cannot afford in the first place. And if you make profit from piracy this is a whole other discussion I would gladly here your thoughts about it.
I checked your history and you seems to genuinely interact but you’re sentence makes no real argument (more like a joke).
But maybe you haven’t read the rest of the conversation so here some points:
You can and are encourage to download and use free software. Same with comments.
You are not allowed to monetized free software (hence the GPL v2 vs v3 debate). To be honest also with my comments.
The term stealing could indeed be confused with the modern usage of fascists who want to fight against piracy but it was used for a good century by communist to talk about capitalists stealing surplus value made by workers.
Yes it was a joke, sorry. The propaganda video about “downloading a car” was an incredibly stupid but massive campaign and in hindsight incredibly successful in influenced attitudes.
I don’t think any discussion is useful because I am fundamentally and radically opposed to turning intellectual ideas or works into “property” and it’s abhorrent and obscene to me. There are other and better ways to fund or reward artist’s work. Naturally I hate patents even more. They also delay market adoption for climate change solutions by 20 years. A crime against humanity! And no, that one is not a joke.
The worst thing that fuckai could lead to is help legitimize some kind of “IP tax” for use of AI models, which would as a side effect make it illegal piracy to use any open weight models. Then big tech gets to monopolize AI in the west. They can afford the tax. But we’ll forever be limited and dependent in making use of LLM models.
Measured perspectives are hard to come by. A Marxist Perspective On AI
There’s nothing Marxist in that article. Only fallacies from rich white man ranting about people pushing back against fascism.
People say AI to mean LLM first because main stream western, fascist, media pushed the term by inviting exclusively non-expert and CEOs to talk about the subject. People are pushing back against a product that is mean to make workers dull and replace them by
stealing their works even by capitalist standards-> exploiting their works, appropriating it to themselves without any compensation nor permission.The article tried to paint the discussion as anti-llm would be anti technology, which is not Marxist in any way and not relevant. Weirdly enough fascist guy like the one on this article don’t talk about cryptocurrency as something we should chill for. Isn’t it a tool too?
Current LLM chill is the opposite of dialectical materialism: what is the concrete analysis here? LLM outputed nothing of value for years despite the hundred of billions invested. Worst it actually participate to global warming, bourgeoisie attempt to mass control, getting rid of workers and inflating computer costs. So the real consequences for people are losses only.
And for what? To get to have unskilled rich white people who can afford the awfully hight price of LLM to boats about “I made this” while it is actually made from steal and empoverish people and enriching tech lord’s.
So no, thanks, and trying to paint fallacies to Marxism isn’t going to help either.
EDIT: replace the “stealing” argument as pointed out -> https://lemmy.ml/post/54102413/28384201 , this can be confusing with the anti-piracy propaganda vocabulary.
Stealing: when you don’t have it anymore afterwards.
Copying: when both have it afterwards
The RIAA’s propaganda campaign was sadly very successful.
Actually let me analyze again your comment here: I thought you were right at first but thinking about it not really.
First let me address : I didn’t know about RIAA, this kind of paternalistic way of addressing people is not good in any way. We aren’t all USA-centric (like you?).
Then about the “steal” argument:
Downloading this comment is not authorized.
You wouldn’t download an argument, would you? Or would you? What, you’re reading this in your browser without authorization from me?? FBI, open up!!!
are you trolling?
I checked your history and you seems to genuinely interact but you’re sentence makes no real argument (more like a joke).
But maybe you haven’t read the rest of the conversation so here some points:
Yes it was a joke, sorry. The propaganda video about “downloading a car” was an incredibly stupid but massive campaign and in hindsight incredibly successful in influenced attitudes.
I don’t think any discussion is useful because I am fundamentally and radically opposed to turning intellectual ideas or works into “property” and it’s abhorrent and obscene to me. There are other and better ways to fund or reward artist’s work. Naturally I hate patents even more. They also delay market adoption for climate change solutions by 20 years. A crime against humanity! And no, that one is not a joke.
The worst thing that fuckai could lead to is help legitimize some kind of “IP tax” for use of AI models, which would as a side effect make it illegal piracy to use any open weight models. Then big tech gets to monopolize AI in the west. They can afford the tax. But we’ll forever be limited and dependent in making use of LLM models.