Technology
Which posts fit here?
Anything that is at least tangentially connected to the technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and 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
This race to displace human labor with AI is a typical late-stage capitalism race to the bottom because it ignores something fundamental: workers are also consumers. No job, no money, no purchases.
In other words, all companies embracing AI are collectively working their ass off to destroy their own and everybody else's markets. It's global economic suicide.
But... capitalism being what it is and doing what it does, it only looks at what the competition does, expenses and no further than the next quarter. So individual corporations see AI as a way to reduce expenses and get ahead of the competition that does the same thing.
They all know AI will destroy everything eventually, including themselves, if they all do the same thing. But they can't help it: corporations look no further than their own selfish interests with the narrowest possible set of criteria, and the bigger picture be damned. Always.
Capitalism ain't the problem. Capitalism for the economy and democracy for the government is the best we humans have figured out. Problem being, money, as in any system, has been funneled to the top. The top took our vote via lack of education and media control, and their power has been snowballing for the last 20-30 years. Now we're too ignorant and misled to vote in our own best interests. We're seeing the end game, the end game of any unregulated system.
Said many times, almost every evil of capitalism gets nullified when the government disallows and breaks monopolies and megacorps. Adam Smith, the father of capitalism, argued vehemently against monopolies.
Having grown up in the 70s and 80s, I am stunned by what is allowed. A handful of corporations own and control our health, food, entertainment, news, banking, everything. Education is the one thing that's not wholly corporate, and the oligarchs have had that sector in their sights for decades.
And they're not after education merely to skim more money. Education in history, math, critical thinking, is how they can be beaten. FFS, we're repeating the mistakes of exactly a century ago, people can't figure when back-of-the-napkin math doesn't make sense and can't tell when they're being conned. I see the latter two on lemmy, daily.
Blaming capitalism is as naive as saying, "Trump did this!". We can acheive nothing but backlash. Instead say, "The GOP did this!" (politically) and "The billionaires did this!" (economically). Words matter if you want to win hearts and minds.
The problem is, though, that money allows politicians in a democracy to run a better, more effective campaign. So whoever gets the support of rich people is more likely to win. In that sense, modern democracies aren’t equitable systems anymore. One person does not mean one vote anymore because one person with a billion dollars has an outsized influence. You correctly identified the problem that a handful of corporations control own and control the essential services we need to live our lives but that’s because capitalism allows that. Capitalism is the problem.
And what economic system fails to allow the money to flow to the top? The Soviets tried socialism as a ladder to communism, were about instantly corrupted. Any system we wish to discuss has to take human behavior into account, and not idealized human behavior.
The government has to be the brake, and the people have to have the education in history, math, politics, current affairs and critical thinking to power that engine.
Now the trick becomes keeping the wealthy from taking that education. I have no answer.
Socialism works in small groups, no better system. But we didn't evolve to work in groups of more than 150-200 individuals, let alone 8 billion.
Anyway, I posted more on c/unpopularopinion. I'm sure I'm taking a beating over there. :)
https://lemmy.world/post/38200626
A system where you take money out of the equation. You’re right that we have to take human behaviour into account. That’s one of the more prominent critiques for Marx by neo-marxists. I’m not saying that we replace capitalism overnight. The technological progress brought about by capitalism has lifted billions out of poverty (albeit at the cost of irreparable damage to the biosphere) but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t strive for a better system. In the meantime, being aware of the pitfalls of capitalism and trying to build class consciousness and a more equitable society is still a worthwhile goal to have. It took hundreds of years for capitalism to evolve and entrench, going from feudalism to Industrialization and now Technological Oligarchy. It pervades so much of our thought, culture and way of life that any proposed alternative is seen as wildly radical. We have to learn to gradually disengage from it if we hope to bring lasting change.
For what it’s worth Lenin himself said that the USSR was state capitalist and not socialist. Lenin wanted to create socialism from the top down, establishing a dictatorship that takes control of the means of production (state capitalism) and then gives it to the workers later. This never happened because when Stalin came to power he just decided state capitalism = socialism. There are however different ways to try to achieve socialism eg the democratic socialist way or the original Marxist way
When somebody casually says the word "dictatorship" as a serious solution to a problem, they have already failed.
This wasn’t a literal dictatorship but a “dictatorship of the proletariat” which, for Lenin, meant a democratic centralist government run by the communist party. Their is some deviation between Lenin’s and Marx definitions of “dictatorship of the proletariat”, however the main idea is a proletariat government that oppresses the bourgeois, mainly by seizing their means of production.
Sounds like a dictatorship ran by one party.
No, they tried communism as a ladder to socialism, entered the dictatorship of the proletariat phase, and were instantly corrupted. Because, you know... dictatorship.
Lenin's idea of socialism will never work, because it is far too optimistic, and does not factor the corruptibility of humans. Every single example of communism that has ever plagued a country is a prime illustration of that failure.