For those unaware, Linus Torvalds this year has deeply cast his lot with the hyperscale LLMs for development of Linux code, dismissing arguments that this is an abdication of responsibility over that code base.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 8 points 5 hours ago (1 child)

I think you're assigning too much free will to people and societies. If you take the Marxist perspective that technology creates its own social infrastructure - who owns what, who does what, who gets the benefits, who receives power and who is disposessed - then technology can be seen as inherently political. If and when a technology appears, that reshapes society in ways that significantly change the benefits distribution of society's labour, the distinction between the inert technology itself and its effects on society becomes an academic discussion. Even if this technology can only reshape society when that society exists and is combined with the technology. So rather than focusing on the academic distinction, I think people would care more about focusing on the social effects, which are political, and whether there are opportunities to make these effects benefit them (us).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -2 points 4 hours ago

    I think we are ultimately in agreement with a subtly different perspective on things.

    Nothing is inherently political, but everything is ultimately within the realm of politics. Land itself isn't political until people draw lines on it and start making claims.

    Inert, lifeless things are not themselves inherently political. Their uses and the people who decide such make them so.

  • source
  • parent