"The point of AI is to permit the wealthy to access the benefits of the talented, while preventing the talented from accessing the benefits of wealth." [Paraphrased, I didn't remember who originally said it.]
post
I thought they were going to use AI to share their wealth /s
Trickle-down AInomy!
More like wealthy will use anything possible to seize control of everything.
Cottom cuts to the heart of an issue that both AI doomers and AI boosters seem to take for granted: that an AI-dominated future isn’t inevitable.
Given the development plateau tech companies seem to be running into these days, a future built on large language models (LLMs) is far from a lock. (Consider, for example, the fact that after a very recent December update, ChatGPT couldn’t even generate an accurate alphabet poster for preschoolers.)
...
Cottom points to the historical record — for example, the fact that chattel slavery was at one time seen as a preordained fact of life, a myth spread by the wealthiest members of that bygone age.
I like this comparison
ChatGPT couldn’t even generate an accurate alphabet poster for preschoolers.)
And it's already trained on the whole of human knowledge. That's what gets me about LLM's. If it's already trained on the entirety of human knowledge, and still can't accurately complete these basic tasks, how do these companies intend to fulfill their extravagant promises?
Hahaha. The wealthy are using THEIR WEALTH to seize control of everything. Always have, always will.
I have a plan guys.
Well. Plans.

Gen AI and the people behind it are profoundly anti-human. They want everyone dead, diminished, obsolete, and defeated. Refuse AI features anywhere and everywhere they are placed.
Thanks, Professor Obvious
She's not just saying that the wealthy are trying to seize control — she also discusses how they're leveraging the rhetoric of inevitable AI in order to build the foundations for future control. Significantly, she identifies this attempt as being driven by anxiety that the wealthy feel about their future control, and discusses strategies for resisting that.
What she's saying is far from obvious; I've seen so many anti-AI, anti-capitalist folk unwittingly perpetuating the rhetorical agenda of the wealthy by accepting the notion that a society ran by super advanced AI is inevitable.
The wealthy feel anxiety about their future control? Why would they need to feel that?
Yeah I call bullshit on that.
Automation is inevitable, doesn’t mean decision making will be.
Having fully automated factory that churns out 100 cars a day is not dystopian if you can have people able to configure that number.
The dystopian part is having only a few with “admin access”.
Call bullshit on what, sorry? I'm not clear on whether you're calling bullshit on the professor in the article, or the wealthy assholes who the professor is critiquing
Dystopian is when they finish the fully automated kill bots that kill you if you don't get to work on time.
From 1996-2007 Windows users already told the world that 'AI Assistants' can just fuck off. It was called Clippy, and everyone hated it! We will crush you just like we crushed Clippy.

top 31 comments