Un trop vert timide

Reminder of my only two previous comments in this topic:

Both can be true.

and

I’d understand if these tools were small scale, eco-friendly, ethically developped and trained, and owned by the workers.

Considering most LLM and AI/AI-adjacent tools used are large-scale tools created and owned by big greedy corporations, I’d say the tools themselves are a product of late stage capitalism, thus the bad results they produce are results of simultaneoulsly :

• the tools themselves
• why they were created
• how they were created
• why they are used
• how they are used
• …
• late stage capitalism (which also influnce the previous items)

End of the reminder.

Your answer to that was:

You started by saying they produce the issues, but are now explaining what I said above, that they are a product of upstream social issues.

What motivated my answer is:

Most events have multiple causes and multiple consequences. All of them can also interfere with each other. They can form retroaction loops too.

What I was explicitely saying is:

These tools were created and specialised for late-stage capitalism goals. There will be some common consequences, including bad ones, between usage by the big corpos and usage by random persons, whatever their skills. That’s why I said that both these takes are true:

The output of LLMs is massively increased global warming, increased prices of goods and services, decreased number of jobs, increased numbers of bugs in software, massive increase in wealth migration from poor to the rich, and increased surveillance. None of that has to do with the quality of the users. Just using it at all results in all of those things.

and

those things are the outputs out late-stage capitalism.

It seems that we disagree about my view, but don’t attribute to me shit I didn’t say to fight this false argument.

So…

Is this worth discussing.

Apparently no, at least not when you oversimplify causality and misrepresent what I said. Still worth argumenting for others to have more arguments to weight.

Now, this discussion looks to me like the stupid “debate” around “guns kill people” VS “guns don’t kill, only the people using them do” in the specific context of gun control laws.

And also, fuck capitalism, and other systems of exploitation, oppression, domination.

I’d understand if these tools were small scale, eco-friendly, ethically developped and trained, and owned by the workers.

Considering most LLM and AI/AI-adjacent tools used are large-scale tools created and owned by big greedy corporations, I’d say the tools themselves are a product of late stage capitalism, thus the bad results they produce are results of simultaneoulsly :

• the tools themselves
• why they were created
• how they were created
• why they are used
• how they are used
• …
• late stage capitalism (which also influnce the previous items)

Both can be true.

In other words, claiming to be “apolitical” (whatever that means) is a political stance.

From what I understand, that flaw can be lessened (not voided) by using sociology instead of eugenics/pseudobiology. So-called “races” as social constructs, or “perceived races” are less based on discrimination. This concepts can instead describe the existing discrimination. That does not nullify your point, by the way, it just dampens the flaw you pointed to.

Putting aside the doom recompilation meme, I find this idea conceptually funny.

Thank you, but the pessimist I am cannot reassure you on this point.

Currently France and most of its population are very far from that fierce image, and that’s not new.

Our so-called “leaders” follow objectives and methods similar to their U.S. counterparts, with an apparent lag / delay. Our ten years president is a neo liberal with also some traditionalist catholic views on social norms. The asymetry in apparent power is such that those politicians don’t have too much to fear from the general population. (For now at least.) They just have to get enough people to vote for them once in a while, and manipulative communcation campaign do the job real fine.

Demonstrations and strikes don’t often work: they are generally ignored, circumvented, or smeared, criminalized, and sometimes violently repressed. (With accusations of terrorism). We even have a very violent “police” unit seemingly fully dedicated to beat up demonstrators. (The “BRAV-M”.) More powers, more tools, more weaponery and legal protections are given to the police (or similar) forces.

The fatigue and discouragement from our worsening living conditions depowered the fights for general interest causes. (against domination and exploitation systems, for example)

But !.. the same worsening living conditions are becoming bad enough that people become more afraid of being passive than of the consequences of opposing the “elites” and their goons. I sure hope the balance will tip in favor of those who fight for a better life before the faschist-style authoritarism is fully installed.

2027’s elections will be quite a battleground, but honestly we’re in need of more than some “providential” elected president with a good program. The framework of our current institutions system is rotten, focused on presidential power, and must be discarded to a framework based on equality of rights, equality of opportunities, solidarity, freedom, respect, compassion.

TL;DR:

France is currently not as much a land of rights and successful social fights as some believe or claim it is. It is also not a land of freedom anymore. (See freedom of press rankings, for example.) It’s rapidly (d)evolving into a fully fledged capitalist owned, highly repressive, police state. There are reasons for despair, but also some reasons for hope. All is not lost, but the fight will be arduous.

The same strategy is used in France. Our social welfare, including retirement funding and medical care, is being dismantled this way.