technology

23303 readers

352 users here now

On the road to fully automated luxury gay space communism.

Spreading Linux propaganda since 2020

Rules:

1. Obviously abide by the sitewide code of conduct. Bigotry will be met with an immediate ban
2. This community is about technology. Offtopic is permitted as long as it is kept in the comment sections
3. Although this is not /c/libre, FOSS related posting is tolerated, and even welcome in the case of effort posts
4. We believe technology should be liberating. As such, avoid promoting proprietary and/or bourgeois technology
5. Explanatory posts to correct the potential mistakes a comrade made in a post of their own are allowed, as long as they remain respectful
6. No crypto (Bitcoin, NFT, etc.) speculation, unless it is purely informative and not too cringe
7. Absolutely no tech bro shit. If you have a good opinion of Silicon Valley billionaires please manifest yourself so we can ban you.

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

226

AI Wasteland (hexbear.net)

submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

98 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Luddism was a rational reaction to something used to crush a very early form of working class, the luddites weren't the stupid assholes theyre commonly portrayed at, you might want to self crit on using an ancient cliché whipped up by factory owners and capitalists because yikes.

Its amusing to get this kind of accusation because I do unfortunately use AI, ive used it for years before it exploded like it did back in 2022-23, yet i always thought of it as yet another stupid grift, used only to bypass artistic process and come up with the most boring slop with the widest appeal.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I can see how my comment implied that I think Luddites are idiots but that wasn't my intention. "I don't think you're stupid luddites" as in I don't think your qualms are stupid. Furthermore, I don't think Luddites were either. That being said, I will critique them as Marx did. Early Luddism did explicitely destroy factory equipment. I will note that when I say that it is based merely on Marx's comments in capital in reference to the movement. I'm not a historian and my knowledge of them ends there. If you have new information to contradict his account then please pass it along.

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 work people 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. (pg 287 on marxists.org)

Getting your way of life destroyed and being pissed off at the means in which it is done is understandable. However, to my understanding of this part of Capital, the Luddites did make this mistake. That's not stupid. It's understandable if not misguided. So when I say "it literally is Luddism" I meant that it seemed like you're saying the technology is necessarily evil. Technology on it's own literally cannot be evil. It is inanimate and its application is brought about by people. When I read your comment it seemed to me as though you were overlooking this.

It's amusing to get this kind of accusation

First off, don't write like a redditor. Don't be a pompous ass who writes for the audience and just talk with me.

I'm not accusing you of any thing. In fact, my language usage explicitly acknowledges my own fallibility. I specifically used a word like "seems" to show this. That is to show that there may be a breakdown in communication rather than disagreement.