Technology
Which posts fit here?
Any news that are at least tangentially connected to the technology, social media platforms, informational technologies or tech policy.
Post guidelines
[Opinion] prefix
Opinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title.
Rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original link
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacks
Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Companion communities
!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.
view the rest of the comments
Marx did not - could not - conceive of thinking machines in Capital. AI is in a different class than a weaving mill.
But human society is still somehow connected to human effort.
"Marx could not conceive of ~~thinking~~ programmable machines"
Are you sure about that?
All the ways that loom stitching - like a player piano - is not Turing complete, much less like large training set AI.
And those looms inspired Chuck Babbage to build the Difference Engine, which was at the 1862 World's Fair. Years before Marx started writing Capital.
So again, when you say these machines are inconceivable to Marx...
But AI, at this point and for the foreseeable future, is not a thinking machine. It’s a probability machine. It can do some neat tricks and some helpful things, but it is not thinking.
I would also posit that AI is in many ways less useful than tech that came before it. Computers largely augment what people had been doing on paper for centuries before, just faster, more consistently, easier. AI promises to outsource thinking, which isn’t augmenting something people already do (or at least should do). But at this point, it fails to do even that.
I agree that AI would be unimaginable for Marx, but on the other hand I think the labor theory of value is still holding up. Has any AI actually generated value for anyone?
If a new machine gives an efficiency advantage over other makers of equivalent commodities - the owner of that machine reaps a financial advantage that is experienced as "generated value". But as the new machine and any efficiency in production becomes generalized we would expect that ultimately the value of that commodity would actually decrease.
The particular qualities of the machine itself are practically irrelevant. It doesn't matter what the machine does, what inherent qualities it has. What matters is the relation it has to workers and the capitalists.
"Machines were the weapons used by the capitalists to quell the revolt of specialized labor"
-- some blurry guy
You're right, it's an entirely new class of machine. A fucking stupid class that should be taken out back and shot.
These machines don't think, though. They are the same glorified calculators we've been using, just with slightly updated formula sets. What we should be focusing on is the advent of quantum computing, which will supercharge everything we're currently dealing with. That will be our generation's Y2K. I read recently that quantum will become cheap enough to start disrupting things as early as 2029, which is not very far away.