• disco [any]
    ·
    edit-2
    3 years ago

    Before reading the article, i just have to say that technology has advanced hugely in the past 20 years, in ways that have completely changed the world. And we are on the cusp of further tremendous advances, especially involving artificial intelligence.

    So if the thesis of the article is really what you said in the title, its just not anywhere close to true.

    That said, I’ll report back after reading it.

    • Speaker [e/em/eir]
      ·
      3 years ago

      lmbo, AI is 10% matrix multiplication and 90% exploiting the global south for slave waged piecework "training the model".

      • disco [any]
        ·
        3 years ago

        Electricity is just magnets spinning around a coil of copper wire.

        • Horsepaste [they/them]
          ·
          edit-2
          3 years ago

          Technology has not progressed since Benjamin Franklen. We’ve been stagnant since 1776.

          • EmmaGoldman [she/her, comrade/them]M
            ·
            3 years ago

            The only way to convince America to switch to renewables will be making a corporation with the stated goal of replacing the entire grid system with lightning kites that collect power from thunderstorms and calling it FreedomPower. Put a cartoon Ben Franklin in all the ads and it will work.

      • gullyfoyleismyname [none/use name]
        hexagon
        ·
        3 years ago

        AI is impossible. like one individual cockroach is smarter than the best computers in the entire world. It's all a scam to rope in money from nerds who think sci fi is real

              • Multihedra [he/him]
                ·
                3 years ago

                Mate.. have you listened to/read the Ian Wright talk on capital as a living god? (here

                It’s pretty tangential but any talk of controls or feedback in data processing, and my mind jumps to it. I find it super interesting at least, and I feel like you might enjoy it

        • Omega_Haxors [they/them]
          ·
          edit-2
          3 years ago

          If/then still outperforms their most advanced AI. 90% of AI startups just end up hiring humans in secret.

          • Horsepaste [they/them]
            ·
            3 years ago

            If/then still outperforms their most advanced AI

            At doing what? ai is a type of tool. As it stands right now, it augments what humans can do.

            • Omega_Haxors [they/them]
              ·
              3 years ago

              That's all fine and good but often the AI are built to work on their own rather than alongside us, and are impossible to work with as a result.

              • Horsepaste [they/them]
                ·
                3 years ago

                How do you mean? I agree that they work best when designed with augmentation vs replacement in mind.

                • Omega_Haxors [they/them]
                  ·
                  3 years ago

                  A lot of AI is just capitalist attempts at worker replacement. Notice how few of them say "will make work better" and how many of them say "will make work obsolete"

                  • Horsepaste [they/them]
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    3 years ago

                    Yeah, capitalists have been obsessed with automation as long as they’ve existed. Sounds like we both agree that it should be focused on making work better.

                    I saw an old ad from the 80’s for an IBM home computer that really surprised me. It’s pitch was that it would save you a huge amount of time that you could then spend with your family instead of working.

        • Horsepaste [they/them]
          ·
          3 years ago

          Like one individual cockroach is smarter than the best computers in the entire world.

          What’s your definition of smarter? I’ve never seen a cockroach play chess, generate art, or calculate the likelihood of financial fraud on transactions.

      • Horsepaste [they/them]
        ·
        3 years ago

        90% exploiting the global south for slave waged piecework “training the model”.

        Do you have any sources about this? I’d love to read up on it.

    • gullyfoyleismyname [none/use name]
      hexagon
      ·
      3 years ago

      Before reading the article, i just have to say that technology has advanced hugely in the past 20 hears,

      how? society has not moved and inch since the 80's. if technology was as transformative as it was in the past we'd see the 80's as a hopelessly antiquated time abyss instead of the last time mass culture created anything

      • disco [any]
        ·
        3 years ago

        This is just head in the sand doomerism. You’re deliberately ignoring the evidence of your own senses.

        The internet has put the sum total of human knowledge in the palm of our hands. I have a universal translator in my pocket that I can point at a road sign or written document and see it translated in real time. These are changes that are fundamentally changing society the world over.

        You could argue that the changes haven't been for the better, but the changes aren’t finished yet. These technological changes are causing social upheavals that likely wont be resolved for decades to come.

        • GenXen [any, any]
          ·
          3 years ago

          For the technologies that did emerge proved most conducive to surveillance, work discipline, and social control. Computers have opened up certain spaces of freedom, as we’re constantly reminded, but instead of leading to the workless utopia Abbie Hoffman imagined, they have been employed in such a way as to produce the opposite effect. They have enabled a financialization of capital that has driven workers desperately into debt, and, at the same time, provided the means by which employers have created “flexible” work regimes that have both destroyed traditional job security and increased working hours for almost everyone. Along with the export of factory jobs, the new work regime has routed the union movement and destroyed any possibility of effective working-class politics.

        • Fartbutt420 [he/him]
          ·
          3 years ago

          The Internet is a remarkable innovation, but all we are talking about is a super-fast and globally accessible combination of library, post office, and mail-order catalogue. Had the Internet been described to a science fiction aficionado in the fifties and sixties and touted as the most dramatic technological achievement since his time, his reaction would have been disappointment. Fifty years and this is the best our scientists managed to come up with? We expected computers that would think!

          • disco [any]
            ·
            3 years ago

            It's really so much more than that, though. Besides, the person I'm responding to said that technology hadn't advanced since the 1980s, and that's just not true.

            • Fartbutt420 [he/him]
              ·
              edit-2
              3 years ago

              I mean, there's more to it in that - as u/GenXen quoted - the internet has primarily brought about new ways of exerting social control, surveillance, marketing, financialization, and admin.

              We all spend increasing amounts of time punching passwords into our phones to manage bank and credit accounts and learning how to perform jobs once performed by travel agents, brokers, and accountants

              Graeber isn't saying that the internet isn't a technology that's developed, he's saying that it's been developed in forms that work against revolutionary or poetic activity. That's, like, the whole thesis. Unless you're suggesting that social media is actually good.

              • disco [any]
                ·
                3 years ago

                I'm not arguing with Graeber, I'm arguing with OP.

          • Horsepaste [they/them]
            ·
            3 years ago

            This is a boomer-tier understanding of the internet and technology lol

      • cawsby [he/him]
        ·
        3 years ago

        We went from full genome DNA testing costing 100 million dollars in 2001 to $1,000 today.

        • gullyfoyleismyname [none/use name]
          hexagon
          ·
          3 years ago

          Fat load of good it's done, we don't even have brain computer interfaces or implantable drug glands or people with Iridescent skin because of gene editing

          • cawsby [he/him]
            ·
            edit-2
            3 years ago

            We now have the full genome of over a dozen Neanderthals.

            If we wanted to we could bring them back like they plan to do with the wooly mammoths.

                • gullyfoyleismyname [none/use name]
                  hexagon
                  ·
                  3 years ago

                  Unless I get to eat one and they taste super good it aint worth it. I can pet elephants already and they are way cooler because they're grey and grey is a fun color for an animal to be

              • Horsepaste [they/them]
                ·
                3 years ago

                Graeber really emphasizes in that article about the importance of “blue sky” research.

                Doing cool shit for the sake of knowledge is exactly what we should be aiming for. Shouldn’t be all of our focus, but someone fascinated in wooly mammoths should be able to run with that.

            • gullyfoyleismyname [none/use name]
              hexagon
              ·
              edit-2
              3 years ago

              same. At this point I read Peter Watts books and go "WOW Cool Future!" because at least that has cyborgs and brain implants that eliminate the need for sleep

        • Fartbutt420 [he/him]
          ·
          3 years ago

          Part of the answer has to do with the concentration of resources on a handful of gigantic projects: “big science,” as it has come to be called. The Human Genome Project is often held out as an example. After spending almost three billion dollars and employing thousands of scientists and staff in five different countries, it has mainly served to establish that there isn’t very much to be learned from sequencing genes that’s of much use to anyone else. Even more, the hype and political investment surrounding such projects demonstrate the degree to which even basic research now seems to be driven by political, administrative, and marketing imperatives that make it unlikely anything revolutionary will happen.

      • Horsepaste [they/them]
        ·
        3 years ago

        how? society has not moved and inch since the 80’s

        lol I love how cranky this take is. I’m not going to go and list all the tech advancements and medical breakthroughs that have occurred because it would honestly be a waste of time.

        You’re delusional (and likely privileged) if you really believe that we haven’t advanced technology, culture, and society at all.

      • Philosoraptor [he/him, comrade/them]
        ·
        3 years ago

        Technology has advanced hugely. What the predictions of the 50s and 60s got wrong is the notion that those advances would be working to improve the lives of the average person. The sophistication of the algorithms running Google, Facebook, YouTube, and Amazon are truly staggering, and are leagues ahead of what was possible even at the turn of the century (much less 50 years before that). The issue is not that we haven't advanced--it's that all those advancements have been turned to the purpose of enhancing capital, exploiting normal people, and generally making the lives of everyone except the ultra-rich much, much worse. We live in an age of wonders, but those wonders ain't for you.