Spyke

CEO of Palantir Says AI Means You’ll Have to Work With Your Hands Like a Peasant

The article title is click bait here is the full article:

Wondering what your career looks like in our increasingly uncertain, AI-powered future? According to Palantir CEO Alex Karp, it’s going to involve less of the comfortable office work to which most people aspire, a more old fashioned grunt work with your hands.

Speaking at the World Economic Forum yesterday, Karp insisted that the future of work is vocational — not just for those already in manufacturing and the skilled trades, but for the majority of humanity.

In the age of AI, Karp told attendees at a forum, a strong formal education in any of the humanities will soon spell certain doom.

“You went to an elite school, and you studied philosophy; hopefully you have some other skill,” he warned, adding that AI “will destroy humanities jobs.”

Karp, who himself holds humanities degrees from the elite liberal arts institutions of Haverford College and Stanford Law, will presumably be alright. With a net worth of $15.5 billion — well within the top 0.1 percent of global wealth owners — the Palantir CEO has enough money and power to live like a feudal lord (and that’s before AI even takes over.)

The rest of us, he indicates, will be stuck on the assembly line, building whatever the tech companies require.

“If you’re a vocational technician, or like, we’re building batteries for a battery company… now you’re very valuable, if not irreplaceable,” Karp insisted. “I mean, y’know, not to divert to my usual political screeds, but there will be more than enough jobs for the citizens of your nation, especially those with vocational training.”

Now, there’s nothing wrong with vocational work or manufacturing. The global economy runs on these jobs. But in a theoretical world so fundamentally transformed by AI that intellectual labor essentially ceases to exist, it’s telling that tech billionaires like Karp see the rest of humanity as their worker bees.

It seems that the AI revolution never seems to threaten those who stand to profit the most from it — just the 99.9 percent of us building their batteries.

CEO of Palantir Says AI Means You’ll Have to Work With Your Hands Like a Peasanthttps://futurism.com/future-society/palantir-ai-labor-handsOpen linkView original on lemmy.dbzer0.com
tidderuufreply
lemmy.world

Because most Americans with slack jaws hunch over their smartphone gawking at tiktok videos of people they hope to one day be but never will.

90
Sanctusreply
anarchist.nexus

Really feeling the victim blaming here when they made the devices into virtual heroine

86
tidderuufreply
lemmy.world

There's probably a good analogy out there about addiction but I saw something flashy on my smartphone and got distracted.

41
Sanctusreply
anarchist.nexus

You and me baby ain't nothin' but mammals so we're easy to distract and get fucken enamored

34

Thanks for the link, I just read through the foreward to Amusing Ourselves to Death and am looking forward to the full book.

4

virtual heroine

Bro, come on. People are glued to their phones the same reason you're glued to your computer.

The outside world fucking sucks unless you're a scammer or rich enough to be scammed without noticing it.

It's free to be on our devices, which is why most people are doing it. Everything else costs money that people straight up do not have.

2
ORbituaryreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

"mOsT aMeRiCaNs..."

Blah, blah, blah. If you can tell me how to un-fuck this nation in a way that will actually wake people up, I'm all ears. But the way I see it, these things were insidiously marketed to the whole country slowly and incrementally, like frog in a slowly warming pot of water. Those of us who jumped out of the pot are watching in horror as the rest get boiled alive.

The problem is, frogs don't have opposable thumbs and we can't turn the gas off - so the pot keeps boiling.

49
foodandartreply
lemmy.zip

The best you and I can do is to look out for each other, our friends and family and help anyone else that manages to escape the pot as quickly as possible so they don't get back in..

My thoughts are that people are animals and they'll follow where the majority go, so keep helping others escape the pot and eventually, more will notice there is an exit option and jump as well.

20

At the moment, I see this as the only real answer. Until there's proper organization and resistance, everything is lip service.

Mobilization is easy - the protests and marches get people together in solidarity. But organization takes effort: it takes talking to people, getting numbers/contact info, making plans and deciding what's next...

7
lemmy.world

If you can tell me how to un-fuck this nation in a way that will actually wake people up

People are already Woke Up. They're still powerless.

6
lemmy.zip

Yeah right. Almost half the people I talk to are not happy but are burning their heads in the sand and waiting/hoping for this to blow over. It can't happen here and all that.

3

This doesn't happen in a bubble though. We need those people too. We need each other.

3

We're still in the pot, dude. It's a double-boiler, we only jumped out of the inner chamber where even the metal on the bottom doesn't go above boiling temperature...

2
wltrreply
discuss.tchncs.de

In other words, a slave wants to have their own slaves, instead of being free.

4

That's an ugly feature of human nature, as well as some victims thinking the solution to their victimization is to have someone they can victimize too.

2

Look, I hate the Americans with a seething passion as well, but they're getting fucked over even more than we are right now.

Evil doesn't suddenly become okay when you dislike the victims...

3
Telorandreply
reddthat.com

I know you don't necessarily mean it this way, but there's a very interesting (and infuriating) history to why the US reveres the wealthy. The short version is that the ultra wealthy were pissed about the New Deal, so they used fundamentalist Christianity to tie the idea of wealth to holy favor from Yahweh.

We will have to overcome that idea if we hope to gain real class consciousness.

28
lemmy.world

The short version is that the ultra wealthy were pissed about the New Deal, so they used fundamentalist Christianity to tie the idea of wealth to holy favor from Yahweh.

That concept existed WAY before the United State did.

The old idea was kings were rich because they were ordained to be kings by god. Questioning why the king was rich was questioning the word of god and punishable by death.

21
Telorandreply
reddthat.com

Sure, but why it exists today in the US is a direct result of the robber barons' influence in the early 1900s. The core idea isn't new, but this instance is.

11
lemmy.world

Early colonized America used slave labor by racist christians. Those racist christians said they were supposed to be rich because god made them that way. That predates the robber barons of the early 1900s.

1
lemmy.today

after decimating the indigenous americans that have been here more than 10k years.

2

after decimating the indigenous americans that have been here more than 10k years.

No argument on the truthfulness of your statement, but I'm not sure what that has to do with the premise of society enforcing the thought that the rich are rich because of god.

1
Telorandreply
reddthat.com

Great, congrats. You are today's biggest pedant. Here's your prize.

-1
lemmy.world

I'm not looking for pedantry. I'm looking for clarity. You eluded to a specific action by robber barons in the 1900s. I'm looking for what that is because I'm seeing that idea predate them.

1

It does predate them. They didn't invent it, and I never said they did. I said their actions are the reason the US reveres wealth today, as in it's the most contemporary set of events that have reinvigorated that well-practiced strategy.

If you're looking for specific historical knowledge, as in citations, here you go:

https://history.princeton.edu/about/publications/one-nation-under-god-how-corporate-america-invented-christian-america

https://youtu.be/LvmwGwnJf7c?t=598

3

Makes sense for the overdrive push on the Christianity angle. It's just obnoxious to someone who's going pretty damn secular.

4
lemmy.zip

so they used fundamentalist Christianity to tie the idea of wealth to holy favor from Yahweh

It's much older. That bullshit goes back to John Calvin (16th century Christo-Taliban idiot), and there are even precedents for it in the Torah, though balanced by other provisions about behaving like a decent human.

4

Yes, I know. I'm not looking back at the entire timeline of history. I'm looking at the most recent example, because while the idea is not new, it is not an idea that lasts on its own; people wise up over time, which is why the idea gets rehashed by different figures at different points in history.

2
teslekovareply
sh.itjust.works

Wait, I got banned on Reddit for suggesting armed resistance to billionaires. It's why I came here. Does the fediverse also ban people for suggesting we shoot the bastards?

2
other_catreply
piefed.zip

Pretty sure it depends on the server and the community mods.

3

Fair enough. That's the way the fediverse works. Although if allowing talk of violent resistance will get whatever server I am on defederated by most others, especially the major servers, it's still a big problem for free discussion in today's world.

I am definitely more free here than Reddit, so I am not too worried. I would assume that the mods here are not ban-happy, and would only stop me if I was being irresponsible. I will try to do so.

2

It depends, it's more that it's off topic for a tech sub.

Also calling for murder is generally frowned on.

2

I generally frown on murder too. However, if there is no lawful option to stop people from becoming tyrants, raping kids, killing protesters, etc, then unlawful options tend to present themselves to otherwise civilised people.

1
Sanctusreply
anarchist.nexus

What is it that supplies these oligarchs with power? what feeds their mass surveilance and data aggregation networks? It seems to me only a few moves are needed to place them on the same grid as us.

11
lemmy.dbzer0.com

People with the message and reach to call for mass general strikes and national scale marches on DC still think they can stop fascism with elections. Maybe I'm just too cynical in that regard to see the true situation but it seems after continued release of evidences of impeachable and heinous crimes Congress and the SC are firmly on the side of the fascist, pedophile political cult.

3

This is what we call "cooked"

But theres still one super secret recipe that can save this dish

1
mander.xyz

The system has evolved and is designed to make people obey the ruling class.

2

And systems have been overthrown in the past when they become intolerable.

1
lemmy.world

Whatcha gonna do about them?

It's not like I invite any of them over to smoke a joint. They exist and I can't do much about it

1
scarabicreply
lemmy.world

I mean… what do you actually suggest? We take a vote on Lemmy about who to execute?

1

No vote is necessary, we have multiple complete lists and even data aggregators showing their relations to each other.

1
lemmy.world

These morons really think AI is going to allow them to replace the technical folks. The same technical folks they severely loathe because they're the ones with the skills to build the bullshit they dream up, and as such demand a higher salary. They're so fucking greedy that they are just DYING to cut these people out in order to make more profits. They have such inflated egos and so little understanding of the actual technology they really think they're just going to be able to use AI to replace technical minds going forward. We're on the precipice of a very funny "find out" moment for some of these morons.

176
dukemiragereply
lemmy.world

These morons really think AI is going to allow them to replace the technical folks.

This specific moron was actually talking about people with a humanities degree.

27
yeahiknow3reply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

Even less plausible. There was a paper published recently arguing that by design LLMs are quite literally incapable of creativity. These predictive statistical models represent averages. They always and only generate the most banal outputs. That’s what makes them useful.

46

Well, every academic field needs creativity. But it’s nothing new that people from economic or tech bubbles have a disdain for humanities.

7
lemmy.zip

The degree of randomness in generative models is not necessarily fixed, it can at least potentially be tunable. I've built special-purpose generative models that work that way (not LLMs, another application). More entropy in the model can increase the likelihood of excursions from the mean and surprising outcomes, though at greater risk of overall error.

There's a broader debate to be had about how much that has to do with creativity, but if you think divergence from the mean is part of it, that's within LLM capabilities.

2

That’s a good point. The problem is that LLMs are calibrated for efficacy. Forcing them to be more chaotic also makes them less effective. This inherent tension is why they’re mathematically incapable of consistent creativity.

1
lemmy.world

A healthy chuck of CEOs have a humanities degree. It's a common undergrad before moving to B and J-School.

11
lemmy.world

I think these guys forget that ai is just a program written by drumroll please HUMANS. Sure we could shitcan every programmer and replace them with "vibe coders" and skate by for a year or two but when bugs crop up and backend issues pile up AI is not gonna unfuck the mess they created and it will require human intervention. If these pricks do away with the technical folk well get to that point and suffer a technological collapse because everybody that knew how to code fled or changed careers so they could pay rent.

17

The FOSS ecosystem will be fine, because it's maintained by people who do it for the love of the craft.

3
Pikareply
sh.itjust.works

The scary part is how it already somewhat is.

My friend is currently(or at least considering) job hunting because they added AI to their flow and it does everything past the initial issue report.

the flow is now: issue logged -> AI formats and tags the issue -> AI makes the patch -> AI tests the patch and throws it back if it doesn't work -> AI lints the final product once working -> AI submits the patch as pull.

Their job has been downscaled from being the one to organize, assign and work on code to an over-glorified code auditor who looks at pull requests and says "yes this is good" or "no send this back in"

10
lemmy.world

I feel like so much LLM-generated code is bound to deteriorate code quality and blow out of the context size to such an extent that the LLM is eventually gonna become paralyzed

23
Pikareply
sh.itjust.works

I do agree, LLM generated code is inaccurate, which is why they have to have the throw it back in stage and a human eye looking at it.

They told me their main concern is that they aren't sure they are going to properly understand the code the AI is spitting out to be able to properly audit it (which is fair), then of course any issue with the code will fall on them since it's their job to give final say of "yes this is good"

10
europe.pub

At that point they're just the responsibility circuit breaker, put there to get the blame if things go wrong.

13
ns1reply
feddit.uk

It would be interesting to know where your friend works and what kind of application it's on, because your comment is the first time I've ever heard of this level of automation. Not saying it can't be done, just skeptical of how well it would work in practice.

6

That was my general thought process prior to them telling me how the system worked as well. I had seen claude workflows which does similar, but to that level I had not seen before. It was an eye opener.

2
literature.cafe

There's absolutely no way this can be effective for anything other than simple changes in each PR.

4
Pikareply
sh.itjust.works

I should ask them at some point how it is now that its been deployed for a bit. I wouldn't expect so either based off how I've seen open sourced projects using stuff like that, but they also haven't been complaining about it screwing up at all.

2

I found out that some teams at my company are doing the same thing. They're using it to fix simple issues like exceptions and security issues that don't need many code changes. I'd be shocked if it were any different at your friend's company. It's just surprising to me that that's all he was doing?

LLMs can be very effective but if I'm writing complex code with them, they always require multiple rounds of iteration. They just can't retain enough context or maintain it accurately without making mistakes.

Some clever context engineering can help with that, but at the end of the day it's a known limitation of LLMs. They're really good at doing text-based things faster than we can, but the human brain just has an absolutely enormous capacity for storing information.

2
Canacondareply
lemmy.ca
  1. The rich fully intend to replace workers with slaves one way or another.

  2. AI robots can be utter shit and they will still be leaps and bounds more efficient than the task specific automation that has been replacing human workers for decades.

  3. As long as the rich maintain their monopolies quality of service can drop indefinitely. Doesn't matter if AI robots suck ass when no human employed company can compete and every other option is just as ass.

5
lemmy.world

AI robots can be utter shit and they will still be leaps and bounds more efficient than the task specific automation that has been replacing human workers for decades.

I disagree with this, and we already have live examples today that are good analogs. Youtube is being flooded with AI generated slop. AI generated scripts, read by AI generated voices, over top of AI generated images.

I never seek these out, and actively avoid them when I can tell what they are before clicking on them. In that first 2 seconds of AI generated voice, I can tell this is slop and stop watching it seeking a human generated video instead.

As long as the rich maintain their monopolies quality of service can drop indefinitely. Doesn’t matter if AI robots suck ass when no human employed company can compete and every other option is just as ass.

It can't. At some point the quality of the product drops to a level it is no longer a product. Lets say we're in your theoretical dystopian future where the monopoly exists for cookies. There is no other place to buy cookies except from the monopoly. You posit that quality can drop indefinitely as there is zero alternative sources for cookies. So lets say the monopoly cookie brand was deciding to substitute some of the wheat flower with sawdust as a cost saving measure with the consequence being yet lower quality cookies. At a tiny fraction of sawdust you may notice it, but the sawdust cookie may still be better than no cookie. The monopoly continues to increase the sawdust content until the cookie contains zero wheat flour and is entirely substituted with sawdust. I believe even you would concede you would no longer buy the sawdust cookies at this point. Further, you would have stopped buying them earlier when the sawdust content became so high that the cookie was inedible to you even though it contained some wheat flour at that point.

This same thing will apply to Youtube. If the only thing left to watch on youtube is AI slop because no human creators exist, then there is no point in watching youtube anymore.

The point here, is that even with a monopoly on a product, as soon as the quality drops below a certain threshold (and this point is different for every consumer), the product stops being a product to them.

9
Canacondareply
lemmy.ca

And yet youtube is still the dominant video host.

You're missing the point entirely. If instead of luxuries you look through the lens of necessities perhaps you'll see.

Like replace cookies with bread and try tell me people will choose to starve first. Like obviously not.

You're just too priveledged to realize what I'm describing has been going on in developing countries for decades.

Ask a ford employee 30 years ago about robot automation. Like this is not a new thing in the 2020s. The rich have a playbook for this.

5
lemmy.world

And yet youtube is still the dominant video host.

Youtube hasn't descended to being unusable yet.

You’re missing the point entirely. If instead of luxuries you look through the lens of necessities perhaps you’ll see. Like replace cookies with bread and try tell me people will choose to starve first. Like obviously not.

I think you're missing the point. If we substitute bread in the example I gave and they're putting sawdust in it, then yes people will not buy bread made with zero flour, but instead made with sawdust. Yes, people will stop buying bread in that situation because they would die anyway because the bread doesn't produce nutritional value.

Ask a ford employee 30 years ago about robot automation. Like this is not a new thing in the 2020s. The rich have a playbook for this.

Now you're speaking against your original point. Robot automation has not lowered the quality of a Ford vehicle. If anything it has increased it. A robot can have assembly tolerances much tighter than a human. Where is the lowering of quality from a robot making the vehicle that your original thesis demands?

4
Canacondareply
lemmy.ca

Robot automation has not lowered the quality of a Ford vehicle

I never said that and the quality of a ford truck is irrelevant to the assembly worker who lost their job due to automation.

You need to back up because you have gone down a tangent alone.

The notion that people won't eat sawdust bread is demonstrably false with many historical examples proving you wrong. Your stipulation about zero flour is a moving goalpost and a strawman fyi

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Famine_food

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/dmnvp5/before_the_french_revolution_bread_was_sometimes/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Leningrad

-1
lemmy.world

Robot automation has not lowered the quality of a Ford vehicle

I never said that and the quality of a ford truck is irrelevant to the assembly worker who lost their job due to automation.

You need to back up because you have gone down a tangent alone.

I agree we're down a tangent, but I'm following the logic of your responses. This is a response to your original thesis: "AI robots can be utter shit". Then you introduced the ford example for automation, which isn't shit for assembly.

Which point to you want to back up to that would change our conversation path?

The notion that people won’t eat sawdust bread is demonstrably false with many historical examples proving you wrong.

I'm glad you saw those. I specifically chose sawdust in my example because of those events in history. Those support what I'm talking about. When the adulteration of the food became bad enough, people stopped eating it.

Your stipulation about zero flour is a moving goalpost and a strawman fyi

My "zero flour" comment is a response to your original thesis where you said: "quality of service can drop indefinitely."

It can't be indefinitely. There's a point where people will stop consuming it when it gets bad enough.

2

you said: "quality of service can drop indefinitely."

What I actually said was...

As long as the rich maintain their monopolies quality of service can drop indefinitely. Doesn't matter if AI robots suck ass when no human employed company can compete and every other option is just as ass.

So yes you have completely missed my point and are arguing with yourself, not me.

It can't be indefinitely. There's a point where people will stop consuming it when it gets bad enough.

Yes but I'm not talking about that. You need to go back and reread what I actually said and stop putting words in my mouth and trying to have a discussion with me that doesn't exist.

-1

In that first 2 seconds of AI generated voice, I can tell this is slop and stop watching it seeking a human generated video instead.

Report that crap, every time. I's a plague.

1
lemmy.today

They don't even dream it up any more. They hire brains, sift through their ideas, and say "I like that. Do that."

After that, they are experts in manipulating finances to makes their companies rich, and themselves richer, by paying the people who actually do the work, make the money, and create the shareholder value, as little as possible.

5

At this point, I question whether they're even experts in that kind of finance, or if they're just connected to each other well enough, and have a few willing experts in hand, to maintain their position.

I honestly think the only thing most of them have going for them is that it's their name on the accounts.

4

I can't take credit for it. I believed the man who coined the term was named Carl something.

Or maybe he spelled his name with a K... Karl, Marquis? Marcus? Marquette? Something like that...

2
Insekticusreply
aussie.zone

Just ... please.

I beg ANYONE ... if you see billionaires getting lynched in the streets, FILM IT!

I wanna put some funny Benny HIll music on a video of people chasing Elon around with pitchforks and torches and eventually getting him.

Imagine seeing Larry Fink from Blackrock with horses tied to his arms and legs and run in four different directions and having The Final Countdown play, and watch him turn into red mist when the beat drops hard.

Or Dontard Dump dropped into a large woodchipper with "you spin me right round baby" playing as the razor-sharp teeth spin.

3

Actually woodchipper teeth aren't sharp at all. They're just big and dull chucks of steel that thrash the wood into pieces

2

Not just the high payed software folks, but the data centers are also maintained by highly skilled and hard working techs. And this technology is only possible with constant pristine maintenance if the servers to train their models. They loathe these people just as much and can't wait to get humans out of the process

1
lemmy.world

Ironically us plebs who work with our hands are the people with the skill set necessary to build those things.

28

And most jobs are manual labour. That guy wants to seem like he's making an intelligent prediction about a supposed new paradigm shift for Humanity, but ends up just stating the status quo since a job is a job.

8

And their goal is to make sure you can't do anything without THEIR tools/plants, so that you don't escape from their control.

Imagine we all work with our hands but decide we'll only sell what we produce to our local communities and not large corporates.

4

And we will do it with our own hands... he was right... he was right from the very start

3
aussie.zone

Go ahead, arsehole. Keep pushing people who have less to lose each day.

They’ll craft tools all right.

68
cile.sbreply
piefed.social

I think that’s the main reason they’re trying to build robots. I once read a post by a security expert who said a group of very wealthy people paid him for advice on how to prevent their guards and servants from killing them in their bunkers after the end of civilization. His advice was to become family by marrying their children to the guards’ children, but I suppose using robots instead is much easier.

5

They are programmed to only follow my commands.

But if they actually become sentient...Oh shit!

"Attention: All robots, shutdown immediately! I repeat, shutdown immediately! This is not a drill!"

2

Yeah I think about this with drone swarms a lot. One asshole with even a moderately sophisticated video-game like interface to control a fleet of drones. It unlocks a whole new ratio of haves:have-nots as potentially sustainable in the long run. Horrifying. I've thought before it would be nice to write a short story about it but seems like a Torment Nexus moment

1
burghlerreply
sh.itjust.works

Idk we've learned that American citizens don't do shit all even when the boots on their neck.

2
tomkattreply
lemmy.world

I know you think the snark is cute or funny, but resistance is happening. Courts are ruling on things, people are protesting massively, and Minneapolis is actively resisting. Peacefully. Read your history. Peaceful protest does work.

8

Read your history. Peaceful protest does work.

I've read a lot of history. Peaceful protest works sometimes, and when it does, it requires a level of solidarity and organization we haven't yet seen in the US. It also depends on how psyhopathic those in power are. There was peaceful protest against the Nazis, and those involved were murdered. Resistance against Stalinism went the same way. There's no sign so far that Trump and senior MAGA leadership are in any way constrained by morality or human decency, so it's really a question of how far civil society and institutional resistance can deter them.

Still, peaceful protest is definitely a less horrible option than violent direct action, though it's possible to have both in parallel. Consider ML King and the more radical groups who didn't practice non-violence such as the Panthers, or Gandhi and Chandra Bose.

2

To be fair it's not on most people's necks yet. 80% of people are free to ignore what's happening so far. And most of them have. But the ratchet will click. Likely as not the world will get the bloody spectacle they apparently are craving.

6
lemmy.world

It isn't on their neck to be brutally frank. Going after illegal immigrants and terrorizing Minnesota isn't hitting the vast majority of Americans. History shows when the middle/lower classes become desperate and food becomes an issue that is when the knives come out.

6
lemmy.world

"food becomes an issue"

Literally the first thing any Romanians mention to me about the late 80s, right before the revolution. Stores were empty and everyone was lining up for rations.

5

That is what I read about Weimar Germany. When the middle class found itself on a precipice that is when everyone became agitated.

2

They’re beginning to stir. The only thing they can do is passively resist and they’re becoming more aware of that each day.

4

It's taking time, but the wheels are already in motion.

Each day people feel like they have less to lose and nothing to live for. Crime will go up, productivity will go down.

China is going to lead the world because America is run by people who went to business school.

3

Idk we’ve learned that American citizens don’t do shit all even when the boots on their neck.

Not true, there's been lots of big talk, and some actual organization and resistance.

1

We "peasants" are the only reason the filthy rich have what they have, including food, and clean water to drink. They need us, we don't need them.

Fuck these useless leeches. Billionaires should not exist.

59
lemmy.zip

I'm more open-minded. Billionaires shouldn't exist until we've solved the problem of global poverty. After that, I'm willing to consider the possibility, though I am unconvinced that billionaires deliver any societal benefit that compensates for the many downsides caused by their existence.

3

I'm more closed-minded. Billionaires shouldn't exist, period. What I'd like to do to the existing ones cannot be posted here because that would entail be banned from the community.

1
L_N
piefed.ca

I don't understand why we don't revolt against the billionaires.

51

Because these billionaires convinced the manual workers that intellectual workers are the real problem, so now they're cheering that the "gay office workers will finally be cured of their homosexuality through pain therapy" (I know way too many people believing "getting spoiled as a kid" or not being taught how to be a man is responsible for queerness, which includes "not being the manliest man on the earth").

17

Much would be solved if we were to eat one of them. I mean, it works for the chimpanzees...

6

Not even revolt, I don’t understand why we just willingly hand them power. Like, half of Canada voted for the far-right Conservative party and the other half voted for the center-right, lower-case conservative party. It’s going as expected but we just keep doing it.

4
lemmy.zip

Murder the elite with my bare hands? Welp guess i need to start working out.

46
lemmy.today

I wouldn't bother. They're generally soft and weak. They didn't get rich working hard. You can whup them.

4

But I'm also soft and weak.

I want to believe that they are, but they don't have to worry about working long hours sitting on their asses. They get to make millions while paying a personal trainer and traveling the world.

I sit on my ass and eat. At this point I think my 7 year old could best me in fisticuffs.

3
lemmy.today

Good point. Take out the body guards quickly, deal with the Sociopathic Oligarch slowly.

2

If the billionaires are hard to target, their help will be easier. Once people learn that associating with the billionaires can be bad for one's health, two things will happen:

  1. Less available help.
  2. Much more expensive and much more short term help, to make the risk/reward sensible. If I can work for a month doing risky bodyguard duty for a fascist scumbag and get paid 20 mil, if nothing bad happens to me in that month, I am set for life. That kind of calculus can work up to a point. Just imagine managing this process tho, lol, looking for risk-hungry new fools every month. Not fun, not good for the morale.
6

Yeah but i wanna look good when i do it. Standards have been set. Now I'm not a Luigi but I'm not a Wario either so i wanna be at least leaned up a little.

2

You don't own a shovel? If you have hands, you can make a shovel. We will need the shovels for the mass grave after the elite are all gone. You know, so we don't allow the spread of diseases from necrotizing flesh.

2

There's nothing billionaire oligarchs fear more than people who are capable of thinking for themselves. Of course they want to destroy the humanities...

42
lemmy.zip

Yes. It's this, exactly. They don't hate art, they hate how art unites us. And they hate how poignantly art can express how utterly thoroughly we outnumber them.

8

The groundwork was already set when they pinned all the atrocities of the west on the humanist tradition. The atrocities were committed by mercantilism, capitalism, religion, and colonialism.

The humanist tradition gave us secularism, democracy, human rights, and even the very concept of equality, without which we never would have developed post-modern ideals such as egalitarianism, multiculturalism, and inclusivity.

Those concepts were originally encapsulated by the term "liberalism," hence we have things like "liberal arts," "liberal democracy," and "liberal education." Unfortunately, capitalist conservatives appropriated the terminology and gave us the corruption that is neoliberalism: austerity for the poor, tax-cuts and subsidies for the wealthy, deregulation of markets and industries, just one step away from anarcho-capitalism and technofeudalism.

But people today, lacking the nuance that a liberal education would instill, conflate neoliberalism with humanist liberalism due to the nominal resemblance. Hence, leftists have engendered a hatred for "liberals," when what they really hate are "neoliberals."

These are the kinds of nuances that matter, and seem to be all but lost these days...

2
iByteABitreply
lemmy.ml

Hating on the humanities has been a talking point of the right wing for a long time, specifically because the empathy it nurtures leads to solidarity instead of survival of the fittest mentality. They say that these studies are useless to society, while capitalists are the only class that truly sits on top of society and leeches off of it

1

That's because they don't believe in intrinsic value. They don't believe human beings are inherently worthy of dignity and respect. They think those are things that have to be earned, and earned at the expense of others at that. They think dignity comes from being exalted above others, so they push others down while scrambling to boost themselves up.

They don't want to live in a world where everyone is equally dignified. To them, if they have no one to look down on, they feel they themselves are a diminished thereby. It goes all the way down the social ladder. Even the lowest hick in the trailer park finds someone on TV in a more wretched condition than themselves, so that they can feel lofty.

They view life as a zero sum game, and the only measurement of value or worth that they recognize is monetary. It's to the point where you can't even talk to them about intrinsic value, because they'll think you're talking about finances.

That's why they think financial oligarchs are kings. They view them as "winners" at life, as if they got there by hard work, diligence, and other platitudes, rather than by stealing the value of the labor and innovation of the people subject to them and siphoning and hoarding the wealth of society.

It's why they don't believe in taxing the rich to fund the welfare state. They don't view people at the "bottom" of the social hierarchy as being worthy of dignity and respect, let alone the care and support of society and civil governance. To them, money is all that's important, and when they look at a balance sheet, they see anything going to help the poor as a "waste."

It's tragic. It could have all been avoided, if we had elected better leaders, if education had been prioritized more by society, particularly liberal arts and the humanities. They don't generate profit, so the same people view those things as a waste. But how is a society going to raise the next generation of leaders without a strong base in the humanities and liberal arts?

2

Sorry, buddy. I’ll burn down your fucking offices and data centers before I go back to manual labor.

I didn’t do 15 years of manual labor just to go back to that shit after I finally got out.

35
segabasedreply
lemmy.zip

What's crazy is how fragile their ai ecosystem is. The tech requires insane scaling in the form of data centers. We've hit the Moore's law limit, this tech isn't getting better in and of itself, it just gets better by adding more tpus and servers.

It all goes down if the data centers go down

10

Hopefully we can start to see the real reason why 'capitalist' US is spending so much taxpayer money on AI.

It's for control. If the US AI industry fails, then China will be there to pick up the slack. US oligarchs cannot tolerate anyone but them controlling information, which is why they bought tiktok and twitter.

2
korazailreply
lemmy.myserv.one

I wish him to sleep in a bed made by AI. Eat a meal made by AI. And then take a flight in a plane made and piloted by AI.

8
lemmy.world

"You're right, Paris is in France. Though there is an Eiffel Tower in Las Vegas, it is only a replica of the original. I will calculate our new route immediately. Sorry for the inconvenience!"

5

Perfect. And then later, "I hope you enjoyed your glue pizza. We don't have enough fuel to reach Paris or return to land. This plane has no emergency beacon or flotation devices and is about to "land" in the ocean. Sorry for the inconvenience!"

2
sh.itjust.works

Personally I'd settle for degloving his limbs, scalpings, crucifying, and then burning him alive. If he dies midway due to shock keep going anyways.

4

Yeah, they aspire to neo-feudalism, but that's a political rather than technology position.

32

"Saying the quiet part out loud" moment, because they don't feel like they need to be quiet. They're untouchable.

29

I studied poetry, painting, and music so that my sons could study mathematics and commerce, and their sons could work long hours on the assembly - without having ever studied anything - so that they can consume slop generated by AI that was pushed on everyone by people who studied commerce, created by people who studied mathematics, and trained on the works of those who studied poetry, painting, and music.

28

I'm tired of these techbro cultists without any humanity being in power at all.

27

This guy seems particularly and consistently bad. Or he just doesn't have the same filter as the others.

3
piefed.social

Assume for a moment that AI really was taking all of these types of jobs, which by the way, almost certainly includes CEOs. It would only be a matter of time before robots take those other jobs he's talking about.

A normal human of normal intelligence would see that and conclude that people simply wouldn't have to work anymore. And that therefore, everyone should have their basic necessities taken care of by their governments.

People would be free to do whatever they want, whether it be "humanities" work or creating things or whatever. We're no longer constrained by the fact that our lives depend on our usefulness in jobs to the ruling class.

Only a member of that ruling class would see themselves as indispensable and others as slave labor.

26
Asafumreply
lemmy.world

The problem is ownership.

These scumbags own all the means to produce and will demand compensation for their products. The one thing I don't understand is if these fucks remove all the workers then who has money to buy their products? There isn't an infinite demand for electricians, plumbers, carpenters etc etc... so there are going to be a lot of people without the means to earn a living.

I think the ownership class is thinking of revising "let them eat cake" into "let them eat dirt. We have no need for them."

20

Whatever bad shit I want to say about Henry Ford, at least he understood the basic idea that people could only spend the amount of money that they have or make. That's one of the things he's famous for is that his factory workers could buy their own Model Ts.

We now live in a stupid reality where the world is controlled by rich people who see others as slaves and who are wanting to keep slave labor in perpetuity, even when the labor doesn't need to exist.

9
ramble81reply
lemmy.zip

There goal is to push people back to serfdom. They don’t care if the common man lives in a house or a shack. They don’t care if they can afford a car or have to walk. Their goal is to amass enough wealth (not just money), so they can bribe people to do what they want because they’ll be desperate. Robots, AI and Automation will cover the rest of it. They just need to keep a much smaller group happy who would become slightly better but still fearing they could lose everything.

7

They also don't care if we starve to death. That's just thinning the herd as far as they're concerned.

Don't like being livestock? Better get organized and do something about that.

1

I think the ownership class is thinking of revising "let them eat cake" into "let them eat dirt. We have no need for them."

In the budding K-Economy, that seems to be the case. The objectively wealthy now make up something like 60% of consumer spending. It seems to be reaching the point that the majority of people can't make enough money to even be considered vital to the economy.

5

there is no owner OR the only owner of anything would be the creator, unless the owned is someone with their own will.

interesting to translate this ownership topic to anything - earth, space, buildings, art, AI

4

their "ownership" is the lie we collectively believe, I hate this

3
lemmy.world

Humanities is literally exactly what ai is terrible at.

The tech folks might need to reskill and look out.

People will still be writing excellent poetry and we will need it more than ever. It will be spoken word and written and unreachable by the technical tendrils of these devils for training data.

People who think the humanities don’t matter are husks of human beings. Capitalist dogs with zero personality, no actual skill, and only insatiable greed. And apparently all pedophiles to boot.

These fucks lack humanity. They are AI agents with system prompt “mak munny”. Losers.

24

Techbros have no idea what the fuck humanities actually do apart from being something that girls who wouldn't fuck them in college studied.

12

I’ve been in software my whole life.

My two oldest daughters are pursuing performing arts and I’m backing them all the way.

And it’s not that software/STEM jobs will disappear completely but clearly there’ll be less of them.

6

Can we replace CEOs and the wealthy with AI? They don't do anything AI can't do. Would there be any reason to let them keep massive wealth if they aren't contributing anything?

22

He'd best hope the work those hands ends up doing isn't pulling him by the hair to the scaffold.

21
lemmy.zip

I don't like where it's going, and I dislike Palantir, but I also strongly disagree with calling manual work "peasant" labour. There's nothing wrong with working with your hands.

21
feddit.it

There is everything wrong with having to work like a peasant because wealth hoarders want to hoard even more wealth

21

Let’s try not to fight over the false dichotomy a headline is designed to produce.

It’s bad if we have no choice but to work like peasants to survive.

It’s good if you enjoy working with your hands and probably most people would benefit from doing that more, even if you don’t want to do so full time.

The important takeaway from the article is “Fuck that guy”

6

And many of those jobs still require an understanding of higher math/physics. An uneducated electrician is a dead one.

4
lemmy.ml

Are they stupid as fuck? On the knowledge of whom does he think their models are trained? Idiotic thieves.

20
MangoCatsreply
feddit.it

Not just that, but "working with your hands" has been seen all kinds of machines automating people out of jobs for the past 200+ years, AI/LLM will only make automation more capable, and more undercutting of people's manual labor costs.

8
lemmy.zip

AI/LLM will only make automation more capable

LLM, unlikely. ML, probably, but not as rapidly as the hype would suggest.

And yeah, the disruption caused by the industrial revolution, telecommunications, automobiles, computers and the internet all are likely to exceed any impact caused by broader use of LLMs, which are too costly to train and run, inherently too unreliable for safety-critical or health-critical use, too flaky for any use requiring auditability, and generally of unproven utility so far, outside of a few niche applications.

And I say this as a leader of a technical team that has successfull adopted ML in several use cases, and has evaluated several opportunities to use LLMs. So far, with LLMs, the game ain't worth the candle, even without considering the enormous environmental damage caused by their supporting infrastructure.

1

LLM, unlikely. ML, probably

ML already has demonstrated tremendous capability increases for automated machines, starting with postal letter sorters decades ago, proceeding through ever more advanced (and still limited, occasionally flawed - like people) image recognition.

LLM puts more of a "natural language interface" on things, making phone trees into something less infuriating to use and ultimately more helpful.

LLMs, which are too costly to train and run

That's a matter of application

inherently too unreliable for safety-critical or health-critical use

Yeah, although I can see LLMs being helpful as a front end, in addition to the traditional checklist systems used for safety regulation, medical Dx and other guidance, an LLM can (and has, for me) provided (incomplete, sometimes flawed) targeted insights into material it reviews - improving the human review process as an adjunct tool, not as a replacement for the human reviewer.

too flaky for any use requiring auditability

Definitely. Mostly I have been using LLM generated code to create deterministic processes which can be verified as correct - it's pretty good at that, I could write the same code myself but the AI agent/LLM can write that kind of (simple) program 5x-10x faster for 10% of the "brain fatigue" and I can focus on the real problems we're trying to solve. Having those deterministic tools again makes review and evaluation of large spreadsheets a more thorough and less labor intense process. People make mistakes, too, and when you give them (for this morning's example) a spreadsheet with 2000 rows and 30 columns to "evaluate" - beyond people's "context window capacity" as well... we need tools that focus on the important 50 lines and 8 columns without missing the occasional rare important datapoints...

So far, with LLMs, the game ain’t worth the candle,

The better modern models, in roughly the past 10 months or so, have turned a corner for some computer programming tasks, and over those 10 months they have improved rather significantly. It's not the panacea revolution that a lot of breathless journalists describe, but it's a better tool assisting in the creation of simple programs (and simple components of larger programs) than anything I have used in the previous 45 years, and over the past 10 months the level of complexity / size of programs the LLMs can effectively handle has roughly tripled, in my estimation for my applications.

even without considering the enormous environmental damage caused by their supporting infrastructure.

When it's used for worthless garbage (as most of it seems to be today), I agree with this evaluation. Focused on good use cases? In specifically good use cases, the power / environmental impacts range from trivial to positive - in those cases where the AI agents/LLMs are saving human labor - human labor and its infrastructure has enormous environmental impact too.

1

we need more progressive taxing, ultra-rich people shouldn't exist, let them be rich, just not ultra-rich.

20
lemmy.zip

No billionaires until poverty is eradicated globally. And maybe not even then.

11

Yes. It's so dumb that even the ultra rich have let it get this far.

I don't think Thompson got up every morning thinking, "It'll be neat when my kids cannot admit in public that they grieve for me, because my stupid needless death will be such a balm to the public for all of the other stupid needless death I am causing daily."

Everyone can be a winner while we turn this mess around.

That said, I would still pay $20.00 for a chance to piss on Thompson's grave. He chose his path.

6

People are not hungry enough for any kind of radical change. Media and the narrative is controlled by the ultra rich. That's why for "regular" people socialism is a bad thing.

5
slrpnk.net

comfortable office work to which most people aspire

What ? Do people even aspire to work in the first place ? And idk about you, but I'd rather have been a craftswoman if you could still live off of that.

You went to an elite school, and you studied philosophy; hopefully you have some other skill

You think AI can do PHILOSOPHY !? AI can barely put together one fucking function when coding, and you think it can do philosophy ? Either he's knowingly lying (he is) or he understands so little about philosophy that the AI can fool him (probably also true)

20
Bonglesreply
lemmy.zip

I've had a conversation with one of my friends a few times. Even if she was filthy rich she would still work. People always claim various things like getting bored or needing something to do or wanting purpose.

I would find plenty to do without working and her take on it blows my mind. In fact every argument I've heard from people in general, my response (at least in my head) is that I could still accomplish that thing without employment.

I can keep myself entertained doing the things I enjoy, I can find purpose helping people with my boatloads of cash, I would have time to learn all kinds of new skills. I could start businesses to handle some niche ethically, if the main players are scummy. The possibilities are damn near endless and if I'm ever rich, I'm not going to continue spending my time making some other prick richer.

4

Do people even aspire to work in the first place ?

I work because I'm used to the finer things in life, such as living indoors and not having to forage or hunt my dinner. Otherwise I'd just play music at a far less than professional standard.

On the other hand, my wife works because her work helps people. She'd do it even if she didn't get paid. But it's not manual work.

1

Of all disciplines, he says that philosophy will be replaced with AI. What a moron.

19

"AI will replace a humanities degree, so don't bother going to college," says billionaire who went to college. "I need you to use your hands to build batteries for my shitty AI that doesn't work."

16
lemmy.world

Posting clickbait is almost as bad as writing clickbait.

We want to be informed, not have our emotions manipulated for ad revenue.

16

It'd be one thing if the headline didn't lie specifically to create outrage.

This kind of thing is just one tier of misinformation. Manipulating facts to push a narrative for a purpose other than informing people.

It should be moderated out of existence, so I'm okay with tossing a little shame from the bleachers.

1

I mean... this guy went from his early years as a self-professed socialist who went to protests and believed in social justice... to the most hyper-capitalist "let them eat cake" nutjob that you could imagine. What a world we live in.

14

Of course he craps on philosophers. What good is it philosophy for somebody without ethics?

13

AI can't even crank out a decent powerpoint presentation after my giving it explicit prompts and their shit AI's going to take over jobs? I hope their stock crashes soon!

13
lemmy.ca

if working with my hands like a peasant paid what my job does, I'd do it in a heartbeat. fuck this mental exhaustion and stress, I'd rather be working the field eight hours a day for the same pay

AI is not coming for my job, which leads me to believe it's not coming for that many other 'skilled' jobs

13

If he keeps this up, he may have to learn to work without his head like an aristocrat.

13

Maybe they saw too many of us identifying that the biggest problem is the rich, rather than each other, so they're trying to hide behind a new manufactured enemy.

12

Hilarious that they've pivoted from assembly automation, which is feasible and meaningful and in fact is happening, to arts/humanities automation, which isn't really possible when you think about how training works.

A lot of menial tasks can be automated and that's probably fine... There's a lot of stupid meaningless shit we have to do everyday. And maybe we could eliminate that stuff from the grind considering its all arbitrary, or maybe automate it away.

Regardless, doesn't the idea that both sides of the aisle, vocational and office jobs, approaching automation mean that maybe we should start talking about things not costing anything anymore?

12

as a CS grad and having worked in software for 10 yrs.. this is just delusion.

11

They're stealing the power of information for themselves and kicking us back to manual labour jobs, until they steal that with robots too and we have zero means of engaging with the economy that controls all the world resources, so we just end up dying off, leaving them with the whole fucking planet to themselves.

11
lemmy.world

Didn't Ford's CEO just say they wanted highschool graduates who could do math to be automotive techs making $120K a year?

Plumbers already make ridiculous amounts of money because there aren't enough of them.

The median age in my field 5-10 years ago was 55 years old and we aren't getting an influx of new A&P licensed techs still. The main way the Aviation industry gets it's techs these days is the military and that's not even a sure fire way.

Like. CEO's doing trades when? Because he's clearly mistaken if he thinks that it's not going to be CEO's and upper management people who get their jobs replaced by AI.

They keep trying to replace engineers, software devs and so on with AI at all the tech companies and then having to back out of that decision to keep things running.

11
matlagreply
sh.itjust.works

CEOs will not be replaced any time soon, because they're all in each other companies board and they'll stand for each other (or more exactly from setting examples that could apply to them).

5

A law restricting multiple board memberships would be a very good thing. Say, two or three max.

2

They say all this while simultaneously whining like a bunch of little crybabies about declining fertility rates. What the fuck sort of reaction are they expecting?

9
feddit.org

Who's going to wipe this guy's ass when he grows old?

I mean, in theory, any cheap worker could do it. But once you actually get closer to him, then maybe you decide that you want to work elsewhere immediately, urgently...

9
foodandartreply
lemmy.zip

Who's going to wipe this guy's ass when he grows old?

He's rich enough that he will have a private nurse.

3

Hey grok, what's the most efficient, yet emotionally satisfying way to liquidate our class of parasitic, pedophilic billionaires. Extra points for style!

9

Whenever any one of these assholes opens their yap in public, the only response they should hear back is, "You need us. We don't need you. Shut the fuck up."

9

id also tell my competition to stop trying and get a real job if i felt like they were still a threat, you know, if i was an insecure, narcissistic, sociopath, with a visible coke addiction, and access to large swathes of investor capital, in an industry that fundamentally cannot turn a profit unless its through circular investment.

8

Capitalists are so annoying. The hubris to assume we can accelerate climate change and ignore it and everything will just be hunky dory. It's astounding these ding dongs think they're outside the Earth system and not a part of it.

7
piefed.social

Fine. Plumber $800 an hour. Want food? A carrot for $70. Our society can let the rich win and split into a working class economy where working folks charge working folks wages for goods and services.

7

We can't do that because it takes rebellion, but we can't have that because none of this is the billionaires fault. Its poor people and minorities who are to blame for everything. We can't rebel while every toothless illiterate hillbilly from Alabama has put on a Halloween costume and is going to other states and kicking everyone's door in.

1
lemmy.zip

They want slavery because ai taking jobs makes no economic sense and breaks labor theory of value. No human production means nothing has value. We are literally already seeing this with ai slop!

The humane solution is we get a society where that philosophy major actually gets to be a philosopher in a mostly post scarcity automated communist society... But that would mean these ghouls wouldn't be in power so now they're trying to tell us we need to go backwards in time to feudalism.

What an absolute fucking joke, their technology needs nationalized and given to the people, they belong in cages

6

and breaks labor theory of value

Labor theory of value was shown to be flawed soon after Ricardo developed it. It only works if labor input per unit value is constant. Efficiency and innovation refute it. Also, it oversimplifies the relationship between cost, price and value.

The issue of macroparasitism by the rich is an entirely different problem, tracing back to some ugly legacy features of the state and related notions of ownership and control (unsurprisingly, the same features that rightwing "libertarians" most want to preserve and extend).

1

I’m wondering if those who think that AI will replace our jobs have ever used “AI” (LLM), because it’s not very good.

I’m currently leading a business project at a big corporation, and an AI chatbot solution got pushed into my scope by executives, to be delivered free to the client as a pilot (screwing with my budget). Either Copilot Studio is absolute garbage, or we have incompetent engineers, because they can’t get it to work for 3 weeks now.

I have a hunch that in order for the latest fancy models to vomit back barely useable answers, thousands of the world’s best engineers and PhD-s are sweating blood 24/7, while using computing power and consuming energy that would have been enough for a continent in 2019.

Meanwhile they are also burning money like crazy, with no sustainable business model in sight. I’m not saying LLMs are not to stay, but there will be a huge bust, and it will assfuck the economy and workers, while these idiots will get bailed out by Daddy Small Government.

6

I’m proud to be able to work with my hands and so should anyone else who does. It doesn’t matter if it’s for a job or just around your home. Never too late to learn.

Better to know how to do for yourself instead of being a helpless dick like Alex Karp and his Ancient Aliens theory hairdo.

6
CaptDustreply
sh.itjust.works

He's referring to skilled trades like electrical, plumbing, carpentry etc. People they need to build out the data centers.

9

More basic than that.

I've been in the Trades since 1980 and for the last 35 years, homes have been built - esp. by the big developers - with such crap quality materials that if you choose a trades career, you're going to be guaranteed non-stop repair work.

TBH, I wouldn't own a home built since 1987 - that is when the quality of lumber took a nosedive and the rest of it followed down that slide over the decades..

8

Building incendiary devices sounds like it could become a fun and profitable handycraft...

5

Hey as long as I can get paid like a knowledge worker, I’d prefer to work with hands.

5

Alex needs more people working with their hands. You know, stuff like tilling land, then planting Coca seeds. Follow that up with nurturing said plants until they can be harvested and then he’d like you to use your hands to help process those leaves into sweet sweet Colombian bam bam. From there he’d ask you to use your legs to help transport that magical white nectar to wherever it is that he is currently located so he can deposit it directly up his nose. This is an essential process to delivering value to shareholders interested in trading in subjugation and death.

5

Well, it does take hands to raise the guillotine's blade . . . true. Might also take hands to lock billionaires into the guillotine. So, thanks for the suggestion!

5

Not him, though. He's a different class of human that isn't like us plebeians.

4

This guy has absolutely no understanding of humanities studies like philosophy and original or creative thought, or how AI works if he thinks those are the fields being threatened. If anything, I'd say his job is more at risk. Maybe librarians.

4

I’m fine with going back to a way of life that doesn’t include any of these psychopaths or their shit technology

4
lemmy.blahaj.zone

Manufacturing, manufacturing, manufacturing.

How much shit do we really fucking need to make?

3

Thievery is becoming a better profession by the day.

Beats working for fucking peanuts from the families buying our government.

3

What sounded like impossible in absurdity few years ago seems to be today's norm. Is that a competition of apocalyptic claims, a new religion? Actually these guys keep on trying to convince themselves and others in order to inflate the bubble till the end. It seems to be like coke, they're so high on the power it gives them.

3

Already do, asshole. Some of us enjoy actually building things.

3

They have always looked down on peasants, nothing has changed. Wait until their techno peasants require more electricity and water than their old meat peasants.

3
lemmy.world

He said it like that, or is that embellishment for the sake of clickbait?

3

I believe in this instance it is an embellishment, this is what he said: Karp: “You went to an elite school, and you studied philosophy; hopefully you have some other skill,” he warned, adding that AI “will destroy humanities jobs.”

but then again this is the guy that want to throw urine on his enemies.

Karp: "I love the idea of getting a drone and having light fentanyl-laced urine spraying on analysts that tried to screw us"

And this

https://gizmodo.com/palantir-ceo-says-making-war-crimes-constitutional-would-be-good-for-business-2000695162

2

Their dream is to have us build their Death Stars. We should crush their dreams.

3
lemmy.world

AI hioefully will be able to replace ultrarich CEOs soon too and cost us almost nothing.

3
mander.xyz

Non-human, uncaring machines who amass and hoard wealth beyond human comprehension honestly doesn't sound any different than what we have now.

9

The machines are less likely to traffic minors for the purpose of sexual exploitation.

3

When any AI hyper rants about AI/AGI ask this 1 simple question.

what happens to income.

Thing is capitalism requires income. Without it, it collapses. We have already sold future income (debt) and attention (ads and personal information) is sold as well. If AGI occurs: robots occur; and the snake eats itself.

It's going nowhere. Relax, touch some grass and let the hype cycle disappear.

If it does happen, the discussion becomes all about income not how many employees we fired last month to make line go up. Cause next month line is ded.

2
leminal.space

Notable that it's the author of the article calling people peasants and talking down to workers, not Karp.

Fuck you Joe Wilkins. I hope Karp is right and you have to work with your hands like 'a peasant' in your words. You might have to do something useful for society instead of writing ragebait for Futurism.

2

All while all the corporations tried to adapt AI are getting burned with it.

Replacing me my ass. It's just a lot of anti-intellectualist workers are cheering on the tech, because the ruling class convinced them that the "elite" meant "person with ternary education".

2

People like that CEO despise anything they don't/wouldn't do.

Only themselves are important, only their actions are valuable. Everyone else should be replaced for something cheaper that doesn't involve recognizing other people as people. They only want automatized customers, but right now only people are clients, sooo...

They are destroying their target audience lol. But then, when they notice, they'll start being even more coercive.

They want to monopolize rights and humanity for themselves. Everyone else should be grateful they are considering us as tools, how lovely /s

1
lemmy.world

Did he not see that amazing South Park episode where manual workers became top dogs?

1

Apparently he did, according to this article, and his incredibly unfathomably misguided belief that LLMs can philosophize and have original thought.

1

“You went to an elite school, and you studied philosophy; hopefully you have some other skill,” he warned, adding that AI “will destroy humanities jobs.”

Just keep tryin bruh....

1

Honestly I don't give a shit as long as I can make a living. I wouldn't mind working in a workshop or something. However, I don't think we're prepared for the millions upon millions of people who will lose their jobs becasue of AI.

1