As a tech worker, I can say that techbros are literally a cancer in society trying to push their quick cash scheme onto society
this post was submitted on 05 Mar 2025
75 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
38155 readers
255 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Take a swing then, don't come and tell us.
I have said no to job offers at Google and Meta in the past as well as any startup that wants to "disrupt" any industry with a tech solution.
Holy shit there's a lot of corpo ass kissing in this thread
It's crazy considering the world we all live in today...
the number of credulous corpo bootlickers, even on indie social media, is deeply demoralizing
it's important we just keep practicing the arts and ignore the self-styled consumers
consumer normies don't really contribute anything to these conversations but i can't exactly tag a post "don't bother replying if you believe in capitalism"
Took them 30 seconds to throw animators under the bus to make their point.
It's hopeless. We're all just gonna eat each other so the billionaire class can go live in a giant space station.
While we're at it, we should also go after all the car companies for putting so many horse stables out of business. IBM for putting computers (this was a job title for humans before it was done by machine) out of jobs.
and a million other situations where technology has replaced a particular type of worker
Thanks for your comments. Say, what industry do you work in? How's your retirement fund looking?
I automate business processes across multiple industries (not using AI currently)
My retirement fund looks crap, I'm worried about all of this too but it's still a terrible idea to try to retain a job when it's no longer necessary. Just tax the company a little bit less than they saved, and pay people to go enjoy their lives.
pay people to go enjoy their lives.
The problem is that this isn’t happening. Instead it’s greedy board members trying to find ways to exclude every creative artist so that they can hoard all of the wealth for themselves.
Marx predicted that automation would allow the worker to live a more leisurely life when they were maintaining the machines, vs doing the work manually. This is a nice premise, but it turned out to be wrong. Instead, the workers get replaced entirely and third parties come in to occasionally fix and maintain those machines. Automation is not a bad thing by any stretch, but the point of creative work is to retain humanity and emotion. Using AI voices and artwork is counter to that. At that point it’s no longer artwork and is simply a husk to drive revenue and nothing else. If we replace humans with AI, where does it stop? Why not throw all the creatives out and have AI write the script, storyboard, edit, etc? Mindless entertainment on autopilot sounds miserable.
I think you just identified the actual problem, while shying away from identifying it as such. People shouldn't take issue with ai, they should have issues with capitalism.
IMHO, the point of creative work can be debated, and you're more than welcome to only be interested in non-ai work, but obviously that differs person to person. Some people might think that creative work is there to be enjoyed and if it brings joy then it's valid. Plenty of people can enjoy AI work, even if you're not one of them.
If what you're fighting for is jobs for creatives, then I think it's a bad argument. Nobody should be fighting for more things for capitalism to demand from anyone. Creatives should do their work separate and apart from the threat of capitalism, like everyone else. Anti-AI rhetoric serves to make people look like luddites while distracting from the actual problem - capitalism.
This is it. People keep blaming the literal lifeless machines for the choices of the capitalists masters. No bro, AI is not replacing you. Your boss is replacing you, if it weren't AI it would be anything else that saves them a buck.
The problem at its core is definitely capitalism. That said, AI itself is nothing more than a massive plagiarism machine that is extremely cost-prohibitive to run, which means the only ones that control it and have a say are the ones with the most money. There’s a space for ethical AI that isn’t trained haphazardly on copyrighted works, but what we have today in the mainstream is not that.
As much as I personally hate building anything with AI (programmer that has had to build tools that use it), I don’t hate the concept of AI itself. I hate the fact that the people with the most money to innovate with it are churning out the most boring products so they can go to market faster, while also burning the planet down in the process.
It's only not happening because companies aren't going to do it on their own, the government needs to force it to happen, and the people need to force the government.
Yeah the current admin, at least in the US, ain’t enforcing that lol. They’re all in on AI’ifying everything in sight. AI is a hellscape in the hands of capitalists.
You’re welcome to play video games with shitty fake AI voices, but myself and tons of other folks definitely won’t be.
X - Doubt
You won't even notice when it's done right. We're still in early days at the moment where you can actually tell.
You have fun checking the fine print on every future game just to make sure they haven't used it.
Steam requires devs to place it right before the system requirements if they use it. Pretty big print, pretty easy to find. You can see it plain as day on the Black Ops 6 page.
It’s not a hard one to dodge. I’ll be fine.
it's usually an attack on workers
No. It's innovation. As was horse carriages and other technologies/jobs being out of date
the industry steals directly from artists
Valid Argument!! Training AI based on existing voice actor recordings is true valid concern. But this won't stop the industry with eventually having really good vocaloids, or finding people willing to donate their voice or sell it on the cheap.
these companies are massive polluters/ emitters
Bullshit. There's no reason any AI training needs to happen at 100% duty cycle. It can run straight off pure solar with no batteries. Trains only when the sun shines. That said, the power source is irrelevant to the argument. Not all nations rely on fossil fuels.
it makes you look like a rube
Whining that society is moving forward and a old job is being obsoleted makes you look like a rube. Want to take your voice acting to the next level? Do something like the Critical Role folks did and adapt.
the power source is irrelevant to the argument
Even countries can't yet rely on clean energy alone to power everything they have, and for what we know the electric cost for AI has already matched the consumption of some countries. Google promised they would rely only on clean energy for their own AI, only to admit the task is yet impossible. You also don't mention water consumption, wich is so big it has been made illegal in several countries to prevent shortages.
Tbh it is actually the biggest argument here, because not one AI compagny has ever made a single dime, they all run at an unprecedented loss, without investors continuously wasting money in them they would all have died. The value of AI doesn't outmatch such costs, to a point a lot of economists think it might be a bubble that will eventually explode.
It’s innovation
For it to be innovation, it would need to bring real value, something that eleviate the costs, so far it has none, the only thing AI companies really sell isn't innovation but the idea of it. Funny enough, the tech in itself isn't the problem here, it might sure have real usefull cases and real value, but not in the way we are applying it today and surely not how we are selling it.
not one AI compagny has ever made a single dime,
You're confusing AI Training with AI implementation.
AI Training is the big cost.
AI implementation is where the money is made, and lots is being made.
it would need to bring real value
Are you fucking kidding me? Are you that obtuse to the millions of subscriptions people are dishing out?
Are you not aware of the AI vision systems being used in the past 5 years making fucking $$$$$$$$ ?
All of us gamers out there... all that $$$ into hardware to have DLSS is just 'no real value' ??
Why are you commenting on a topic you clearly have no idea how or where its being used?
You’re confusing AI Training with AI implementation.
True, the training is what needs the most power and water, for the implementation it highly depends on what kind of AI we are talking about and how many people use it per day, stable diffusion for instance is also costly when used. But in the end companies still need to regularly train their AI to stay relevant so the issue remains.
AI implementation is where the money is made, and lots is being made.
"Money is made" yes, "lots" no absolutly not, the money AI companies made are in the small millions per year, while their expenses are in the billions, for instance Anthropic made an impressive 900 mill last year for a ridiculus 5 billions in cost, ChatGPT is in the 6 billions and its only an advanced chatbot.
Are you that obtuse to the millions of subscriptions people are dishing out
Actually all that I said take these subscriptions into acount, the amount of money it generates is simply not enough compared to the cost of AI.
Are you not aware of the AI vision systems being used in the past 5 years making fucking $$$$$$$$ ? All of us gamers out there… all that $$$ into hardware to have DLSS is just ‘no real value’ ?? Why are you commenting on a topic you clearly have no idea how or where its being used?
The way you are mentioning techs that are nothing alike even though it has AI in the name tells me you know far less than I do.
Not all nations rely in fossil fuels
Please list some countries that run on 100% renewables that are massively building AI datacenters, I'll wait. Meanwhile, consider that useful things could be done with the energy required for AI. Even other uses for AI would be better, like automating menial labor or detecting cancer. Instead AI voices replace and devalue human artistic expression, not because they are better, but because they are cheaper.
I halfway agree, but the issue with that is, that's not what happens in reality. In reality these things don't run on renewable energy. And not utilizing datacenters at capacity is just a waste of resources. And they could find people who donate their voices, which would be fair... But they're not doing that. So I think half the arguments still apply. It is innovation though, we shouldn't be opposed just for the sake of it. It needs some proper argumentation.
"it's innovation" and so is letal injection. this is hyperbole to quickly demonstrate to you that technology is not absent ethical considerations.
Horse husbandry is also a major craft and fine art
Is that what you call tying a female horse's legs to a fence so she doesn't kick the stallion being forced onto her??
According to the laws of debate... you can go find the videos on YouTube on your own, I'm not linking to them.
Seriously, what is this opinion post even about?
What? No? Its just a general term for horse work as far as I know. I was trying not to demean people who work with animals.
Hm, I've heard "Animal management" as the general term, with "husbandry" focusing on the breeding and artificial selection, with all the ethical issues around that.
Anyway, it's kind of off-topic, isn't it?
Cars replaced horse carriages, fridges replaced ice sellers... new technologies keep replacing old professions. We're at a large job replacement point right now with AI, new skills will be required, but we're yet in uncertain times as to what those skills will exactly look like.
Not sure which "corpo propaganda" were you referring to, and maybe it's just me, but the whole post feels hostile.
I didn't introduce the analogy so I'm not invested in it. I disagree with your opinions so maybe that's what you're reading as hostility.
No... it's more the strawnan gaslighting to insult people without arguing any point. See ya.
Animal husbandry is the general term and longstanding one for the craft and profession of rearing, training, and yes breeding, non-human animals. this whole argument could have been resolved in 2 seconds with a web search.
also, meekly accepting technology and automation as some impassive unguided thing outside of control or ethics is nonsense. that is why you are being told you are repeating corporate propoganda -- you are.
When I get a web search brain implant, I might stop relying on memory. Or better not.
Blindly rejecting technology and automation, for some misguided interpretation of ethics like "work gives a man dignity", or Gen 2:15, is the feudal corporate propaganda, to put it mildly.
Do you genuinely actually believe automation like llm or voice gen are being developed to free you from work? Nonsense. It's meant to drive the relative value of your labor into the ground so that everyone can be paid less. you see it literally here, a career set you are simply saying shouldnt exist because a corporation can do it without a human getting economic benefit. You should read about the history of the luddites.
The only blind ones here are those who uncritically accept corporate propaganda about technology and walk stupified towards the facade of a sci fi utopia. if you are going to claim that rejection of losing human artists as the barely viable profession it is is blind, at least put the effort in. Dont walk in and go "just like carriages lol" and try considering the issue for longer.
I think automation only cares about increasing the output, not about the effort or exclusivity of the input.
Since you propose reviewing history, let's do it together:
- Artists used to perform for a single patron, getting paid for each performance.
- Amphitheaters allowed multiple patrons to attend each performance.
- Recordings allowed performances to be reproduced over and over.
- Copying allowed millions of patrons to reproduce the same recording multiple times, independently of each other.
...and now neural networks are suddenly the preposterous advance? Nonsense.
Luddite propaganda is corporate propaganda is elitist propaganda, a step back towards less efficient ways of reaping the benefits of labor so it can be more easily controlled and restricted, an elitist approach where artists perform at the whim of someone wealthy enough to be able to afford them.
If you want to discuss the fair compensation for labor, we can start talking about total production, compensation inequality, an UBI system, or whatever. Don't come in blindly claiming that cutting down technological labor amplification, is the only way to get paid enough to live... or that getting paid is even required to live in a post-scarcity world, much less that artificially imposed scarcity is something positive.
and now neural networks are suddenly the preposterous advance? Nonsense.
voice generators and generative ai are built with the intent of replacing artists, your incredibly reductive "history lesson" funnily illustrates only situations distinct from the current situation and you gloss over making any specific claims about the technology, just broad vagary about the trajectories of technological advancement. I dont think you are equipped to discuss this topic honestly.
luddites are corporate propaganda
??? actually just a plainly absurd statement. this isnt even worth responding to it's so absurdly incorrect.
Yes yes ubi, but "technological labor amplification" in this case is driving human artists out of the market. make specific claims, quit hiding behind vague generalizations about automation. it's a waste of everyone's time and terminates your train of thought before you get to something relevant.
We can discuss further if you make an effort to understand this topic, but so far you are just speaking largely in cliches that arent worth responding to and arent worth your time writing.