all 82 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 137 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Oh there's logic all right

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] [S] 24 points 1 year ago (5 children)
  • [–] 44 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    AI is largely coded and trained by rich white dudes in Silicon Valley. Then fed racially biased material, I don’t know what you were expecting.

    Even before the current “AI”, machine learning would do racist shit all the time. Like when Apple Photos would tag the faces of black people and ask “Is this a dog?”

    There’s also an ongoing discussion about how the color balance on almost every digital camera ever made favors light skin over dark skin.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    Remember the response to Deepseek? They aren't universally pro-AI, they want American technocrats to be the ones who control the AI that they feel will eventually take over the world.

    There was quite a bit of "racism" or at the very least fearmongering when Deepseek was released.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 102 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

    Oh that's really easy: AI isn't brown.

    Never underestimate the Americans' capacity for racism. A lot of things in America can be explained by racism.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Can we manipulate AI to have a middle eastern accent?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 58 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Because rich people make more money when AI does it.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 35 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Because rich people get richer and nobody is giving money to the browns.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Don't know about that. The Browns generated an estimated $685 million in revenue from the 2025 season according to Google's shitty AI. They did have an operating cost of about $90 million though. Admittedly I don't know if it's a lot for an american football team, but someone must've given them money.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 25 points 1 year ago

    In both cases, no one is taking our jobs. The ruling class is using both immigrants and AI to suppress our wages.

  • source
  • [–] 25 points 1 year ago

    Immigrants are poor. AI is owned by rich white men.

  • source
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Immigrants have non-white skin and AI doesn't even have skin, which is more preferable because I'm an irrational stupid racist that loves bootlicking rich oligarchs. Hail Corporate!

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 20 points 1 year ago (9 children)
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    the Republican Party sole purpose is to further the interests of wealthy and corporations

    Perhaps not SOLE, but that's also the main purpose of the Dem leadership.

    That's a big reason why they're so bad at messaging: they're having to appeal to a base who mostly loathe billionaires and big corporations while also making sure that the billionaires and corporations don't get annoyed and stop enriching them.

    the only way they can do that is build a platform on racism and xenophobia to trick the less educated or informed into voting for them.

    Yeah, can't have fascism without a million lies and constant scapegoating of already vulnerable groups of people.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] 0 points 1 year ago (5 children)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (4 children)

    a fucking centrist

    Nope. I'm a leftist. Unlike 99% of the corrupt party you're shilling for.

    horrible things done specifically by Republicans

    Nope. Republicans do it even more/worse, but that doesn't mean that the Dems are innocent of it. They aren't.

    telling me both sides are bad.

    More accurately put, one's awful and the other is a literal fascist party and thus much worse.

    Thanks, I really needed that in my life.

    A more nuanced view than "because they're not fascists, the Dems are automatically great and don't need to improve anything about themselves to better represent the will of the people“?

    Yeah, you really did.

    Go take your fucking pills

    After you, apparatchik.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    Yeah ok, you're clearly an absolute idiot and/or pathologically unable to admit when you're wrong, so I'm not gonna waste any more time and effort explaining the obvious to you. Have the day you deserve.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Just give it time, you'll get anti-AI opportunists who target small business owners eventually.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    We already see anti-AI backlash in businesses that want to shove the tools down workers' throats.

    The big difference is that workers in the US have no real power. If you want to be a proper ultra-nationalist in America, you better own something and it better be big enough to fund the solicitation of a few congresscritters. The response to anti-AI activism is to call the critiques "Luddites" (or perhaps Russia/China disinformation agents). The response to anti-migrant activism is to nod sagely and insist the white working class needs to pick more cantaloupes for $5/hr.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago

    Uhhhhh the economy or something

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago

    Because if AI takes your job then eventually a billionaire gets to be a trillionaire.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    because it serves the rich well that people are easily baited into fearing and fighting minorities

    the rich do not want you mad at AI becanuse that is their product

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    To be fair immigrant AIs from China and Europe also aren't allowed in America.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    The republicans haven’t figured out a way to be racist towards AI yet, that’s all.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    It's good if housing and stocks go up but it's bad if salaries and the price of stuff go up. Because it widens the gap between the haves and the have nots.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    Because it’s good for shareholder profit to have us fighting eachother while the privileged few steal our future, freedoms and make earth uninhabitable

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (11 children)

    AI or any other technology is good because doing more work with less people is the reason our living standards are higher than 100 years ago.

    Immigrants that work and pay taxes is also good.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago* (8 children)

    Yes but AI implementations currently don't do that. They just make people lose jobs because it makes it cheaper for companies.

    And also AI and automation is jot taking over dangerous and unhealthy manual jobs but it's taking over programming and graphic design kinda jobs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    They just make people lose jobs because it makes it cheaper for companies.

    Yes, that's what happens when technological advances hit an already saturated market. The problem here is that, due to this baby, the fruits of all this automation are going to the owner class rather than the working class.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Yes but AI implementations currently don't do that. They just make people lose jobs because it makes it cheaper for companies.

    They just make people lose their jobs because idiots believe they make it cheaper for companies"*

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    And what exactly do they make cheaper?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Operating costs. Or at least that's the idea. Don't know if it actually makes it cheaper but CEOs sure love not having people to pay.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    I understand that having fewer people to pay makes it cheaper for companies, but if the AI isn't performing the duties of the people who got laid off, the AI is not making it cheaper for companies. That's just a round of layoffs, unrelated to AI.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago*

    I assure you it doesn't, and these fuckups have a significant cost that we will pay, not them.

    Unless enough of us mobilize, then we can absolutely shift that cost, but the requirement is the bare minimum, and unfortunately 99.9 percent of us don't have that.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    TIL AI was invented in the mid 80s

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago
    [–] 6 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    AI is made by white people while most immigrants are brown.

    Checkmate.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    It might be owned by white people but you should read the names of people in lead technical roles and writing research papers. I promise you will have a hard time pronouncing most of the names haha.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago*

    This is very simple. Your ambitions of being an artist were always completely irresponsible no matter how talented you may be. As your parents told you, be more realistic and aim for a strawberry picking career.

    Now everyone can be happy! AI gets money to make Skynet for Israel, and you get to sneak an occasional nice fresh straberry into your cunt hole, if the AI is not looking.

    Florida tried to force your children to replace immigrants in the strawberry fields, but fortunately this has remained an adult exclusive carreer opportunity, and we don't yet need to cannibalize those uppity children for stealing your jobs.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Both are fine so long as we have a complete land value tax funding direct economic redistribution

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Gah… derp!

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (5 children)

    Easy, when foreign workers take the money, it leaves the USA. When it's an American AI company getting that money instead of an American worker, the money stays in the country.

    Plus, the administration hates foreigners and loves technology. Seems consistent, at least.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    Easy, when foreign workers take the money, it leaves the USA.

    Day laborers taking their fistful of loose change in wages and driving 300 miles back across the border to buy a sandwich.

    Damn shame the labor performed by these workers doesn't stick around in the US economy in any way, either. All those houses and office buildings they assemble, the plumbing they fix, the foodstuffs they collect for retail sale, the electronics repairs, the meals they prep, the nursing they provide, the child care... all goes right back over the border with them as soon as they day is over.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    OP was merely stating facts, don't get all emotional about it. OP never said the work paid for had no value, only that the money paid leaves this country. Once a dollar crosses the border, it's no longer part of our economy. I'm guessing it's not a big problem because the immigrant haters would be screaming about it.

    Anecdotally, it's true. My wife sends a lot of money home every month. Won't tell me how much because she thinks I'll get mad, but it's at least $6,000 a year. She used to supervise a bunch of Hispanic immigrants who did the same. That money now belongs to the economies of the Philippines, Mexico and Honduras.

    Does it matter much? No clue.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    OP was merely stating facts, don’t get all emotional about it.

    If you're reading emotion into my simple straightforward examples, that's on you.

    Anecdotally, it’s true. My wife sends a lot of money home every month.

    And your wife's family imports US produced goods and services back home. In fact, half the reason your wife sends money back home is due to the internationalization of trade between her country and the US. That's why the US dollar spends so well abroad.

    That money now belongs to the economies of the Philippines, Mexico and Honduras.

    It belongs to the international financial system. And it sloshes from Riyadh to Rio de Janeiro. Nobody in the US is made materially poorer because your wife's family has access to American dollars. If anything, they're made richer by way of export markets.

    But that's the kind of macro-economics Americans aren't allowed to learn in high school.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Won't tell me how much because she thinks I'll get mad, but it's at least $6,000 a year.

    Out of how much she makes? Pre-tax obviously, and don't forget workplace benefits, bonuses and the like. See my point? She's sending a hefty chunk back home but the vast majority of the money she makes—and, more broadly, the GDP she creates—stays in America. To generalize your anecdote, according to the UN immigrants, on average, only send 15% of what they earn back home. To a wealthy country, this is frankly peanuts.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    While true that much of their pay leaves our economy, I don't see anyone calling it a problem. Wouldn't the Trump admin be screaming about it? You got me thinking and wondering why they're not, whether it's much of an issue or not. Don't give them any damned ideas!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Both seem bad tbh

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (4 children)

    I don't mind if immigrants pick strawberries by hand.

    I also don't mind if AI compiles all my tedious bibliography & citations for me.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    My condolences to your academic career

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    What academic career? I'm 50 years old. My academic days are far behind me. Woulda been nice to have ai compile all that tedious required MLA bullshit for me back then though.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments