farseen

@reformed_content_marketer@mastodon.social I think we need to further dissect this argument, because if this were the case then the problem can be solved if we just stop treating it as the authority of knowledge. It still doesn't answer why is it wrong to generate code in a company where it will be proprietary anyway. Why is it different from a tractor or power loom in this case? It still feels gut-wrenchingly wrong, but I'm not able to articulate it. It still feels wrong, on top of the ecological damage, or plagiarism. Is it just, maybe we shouldn't have built tractors or power looms? Which takes away the agency from the labour class to the capital class? A labourer who used to be able to make fabric at his own home, now has to rent an expensive power loom or work at a power loom fabric factory at a much lower wage. Part of the value created flows to the capitalist, just because he happens to own capital. Am I realising this only now because I'm the victim this time? @celesteh@hachyderm.io @knowprose@mastodon.social @mcc@mastodon.social

@reformed_content_marketer@mastodon.social so the problem is the corruption of knowledge by slop. tractors made things faster, LLMs challenge and disrupt the fundamental cornerstone of progress - the ever growing towering work of knowledge we have built since the printing press. @celesteh@hachyderm.io @knowprose@mastodon.social @mcc@mastodon.social

@reformed_content_marketer@mastodon.social @knowprose@mastodon.social @mcc@mastodon.social cactus needle 14MB tool calling model is made from synthetic data of natural language to json tool calling. Not sure if it counts as an LLM. It's very niche too

@celesteh@hachyderm.io @reformed_content_marketer@mastodon.social but isn't empowerment of the capital class and de-empowerment of the labour class inherent to any kind of mechanisation, unless the machine is extremely cheap to make?

@celesteh@hachyderm.io If that's the case, then do LLMs become okay to use once they become more efficient and the value equation shifts to more output per unit of value input? (please ignore the ecological, and plagiarism effects for now)

I'm trying to discover when is it okay/not okay for a machine to replace humans, ignoring the energy supply chain. I think this is worthwhile to consider because we could have a future where energy is very cheap and green. In that future, are all machines allowed? The capital class could then enjoy a fleet of robots who never complain, never protest and only requires very cheap fuel, to satisfy all their labour needs. This is an extreme example, I'm painting this picture here to understand whether more machines is always better for the capital class and not the labour class.

I've also had this thought for a while: the wealth of the capital class is a myth. Imagine a rich billionaire sitting on a giant gold mine. The gold mine is useless, unless all of the following conditions are met:

• there is labour available to extract the gold
• there is demand for the gold, which is proportional to the size and the purchasing power of the global labour force

This holds for everything: real estate, houses, cars, aeroplanes, oil, food.

Wealth is realised when there is a large amount of people available to exchange capital for services. Capital by itself is inert.

So my argument is that anything that disempowers labour is a bad thing. I'm not sure about this, but when I think about it, it feels correct. Maybe we should have tried to empower the labour class instead of doing the industrial revolution. Maybe the productivity gains from all kinds of machines could be realised instead by making the existing labour force more empowered (better skill, healthcare), and by harnessing our exponentially growing population.

@reformed_content_marketer@mastodon.social

@celesteh@hachyderm.io I'm from India, but I'm interested in reading US/EU history related to this. I've always wanted to read Marx, but I've never got the time. If you could suggest any books that are similar to Marx's, but more condensed, that would be super helpful. Thanks for the discussion, I really enjoyed it.  @reformed_content_marketer@mastodon.social

@reformed_content_marketer@mastodon.social @knowprose@mastodon.social @mcc@mastodon.social yeah I also think public domain is not permission to steal my knowledge and style of art to enrich rent seeking conglomerates

@reformed_content_marketer@mastodon.social I've also felt that LLMs are also a labour dignity issue. But then I couldn't think of how is it different from a tractor which put a lot of farm labourers out of work. Or the power loom or the printing press. @celesteh@hachyderm.io @knowprose@mastodon.social @mcc@mastodon.social

@reformed_content_marketer@mastodon.social yess, I feel this exactly. But this must have also happened to artisans when they got replaced by factory labour right? @celesteh@hachyderm.io @knowprose@mastodon.social @mcc@mastodon.social