Regardless of one's feelings on the matter, we can clearly say that AI has been transformative because it never fails to provoke heated arguments. And not only that, but the arrival of commercial models, that is, models that can be run either in your browser (on a cloud service) or on your own machine (local) seems to have shifted perspectives entirely. What becomes bothersome is that self-proclaimed communists seem to have done a complete 180 on intellectual property, and this is what we want to focus on.
Thanks for writing this. Refreshing and studied in-depth take on it.
I’ve long been disappointed in the reaction I saw on this subject, including from people who I thought were “on the same side.” It was a learning experience in a way because while I was reading people pop off with vague anti-AI talking points, I was trying to grapple with it through direct experience. It hadn’t really been my intention for it to be some communist investigation thing, but I had sort of stumbled into engaging with it and wanted to take it seriously as something to consider, even if informally in how I went about it.
Where I’m going with this is, it became a sort of hobby but with a communist worldview tint on consideration of it. I consider myself far from an expert on AI or communist theory, but even at where I was, it was painfully obvious that something was wrong with the anti-AI messaging. That kind of moment people talk about where you are familiar with a subject and others aren’t, and normally you might trust them and take them at their word because you are ignorant on the topic, but this time you know some things and you’re thinking, “Wait a minute, this sounds like ignorant bullshit. If it’s like that with this subject, what else are they bullshitting about in ignorance?”
So it’s nice to see some in-depth pushback. I know it’s not always the easiest thing for people to engage with as reading time and length goes, but we need this degree of depth, no matter the subject matter. Twitter-length kind of “hot takes” don’t suffice for dissecting what’s going on. We need to be more than reactive (which is what anti-AI messaging largely seems to be). The trope about “tankies” being right isn’t due to magic, but due to them analyzing systems and conditions with more accuracy than other modes of analysis do, and adjusting analysis if new information contradicts it. We have to get to a place where we can plan, as AES states do. Otherwise we’re stuck in survival mode and hoping that raging against the machine will be enough to stave off full barbarism.
Even if I might seem super pro-AI sometimes I really want there to be good arguments against it and especially of course how it’s being handled in capitalism, because this is how we solve contradictions and uncover dialectics at work.
I just feel that a lot of it has been settled, even as far back as artisanal intelligence which came out only 4 months after chatGPT and yet is still completely, totally relevant - a huge blemish imo, it should be outdated in some areas already, but the arguments against AI are still the same almost 3 years later.
I don’t even think everybody should necessarily learn AI in depth, it’s fine to be uninterested in it, but a lot of people seem to make it their life mission to tell the world that they should feel bad for using it when they could just not say anything, or at least like you said be a little bit curious about it. I’m all for explaining my methods with AI and sharing best practices because I think it’s important. Not speaking about people here specifically, I see a lot of these takes on Twitter usually. Actually I’ve just blocked the words AI now on that platform, I’m tired of seeing all the “discourse” lol. The twitter format of having only 280 characters when we are some of the biggest yappers is not conducive to expanding on ideas and promotes making gotchas and easy wins instead. Lol my essay is super long but it’s ultimately all of my points about AI condensed into one volume.
Thanks for writing this. Refreshing and studied in-depth take on it.
I’ve long been disappointed in the reaction I saw on this subject, including from people who I thought were “on the same side.” It was a learning experience in a way because while I was reading people pop off with vague anti-AI talking points, I was trying to grapple with it through direct experience. It hadn’t really been my intention for it to be some communist investigation thing, but I had sort of stumbled into engaging with it and wanted to take it seriously as something to consider, even if informally in how I went about it.
Where I’m going with this is, it became a sort of hobby but with a communist worldview tint on consideration of it. I consider myself far from an expert on AI or communist theory, but even at where I was, it was painfully obvious that something was wrong with the anti-AI messaging. That kind of moment people talk about where you are familiar with a subject and others aren’t, and normally you might trust them and take them at their word because you are ignorant on the topic, but this time you know some things and you’re thinking, “Wait a minute, this sounds like ignorant bullshit. If it’s like that with this subject, what else are they bullshitting about in ignorance?”
So it’s nice to see some in-depth pushback. I know it’s not always the easiest thing for people to engage with as reading time and length goes, but we need this degree of depth, no matter the subject matter. Twitter-length kind of “hot takes” don’t suffice for dissecting what’s going on. We need to be more than reactive (which is what anti-AI messaging largely seems to be). The trope about “tankies” being right isn’t due to magic, but due to them analyzing systems and conditions with more accuracy than other modes of analysis do, and adjusting analysis if new information contradicts it. We have to get to a place where we can plan, as AES states do. Otherwise we’re stuck in survival mode and hoping that raging against the machine will be enough to stave off full barbarism.
Even if I might seem super pro-AI sometimes I really want there to be good arguments against it and especially of course how it’s being handled in capitalism, because this is how we solve contradictions and uncover dialectics at work.
I just feel that a lot of it has been settled, even as far back as artisanal intelligence which came out only 4 months after chatGPT and yet is still completely, totally relevant - a huge blemish imo, it should be outdated in some areas already, but the arguments against AI are still the same almost 3 years later.
I don’t even think everybody should necessarily learn AI in depth, it’s fine to be uninterested in it, but a lot of people seem to make it their life mission to tell the world that they should feel bad for using it when they could just not say anything, or at least like you said be a little bit curious about it. I’m all for explaining my methods with AI and sharing best practices because I think it’s important. Not speaking about people here specifically, I see a lot of these takes on Twitter usually. Actually I’ve just blocked the words AI now on that platform, I’m tired of seeing all the “discourse” lol. The twitter format of having only 280 characters when we are some of the biggest yappers is not conducive to expanding on ideas and promotes making gotchas and easy wins instead. Lol my essay is super long but it’s ultimately all of my points about AI condensed into one volume.