This is a distraction from the real problems AI is causing, and is ignoring a direct connection between AI and the people in power.
These are not two separate issues, they are one in the same. Saying that people are just trying to distract us by making us afraid of AI is conspiratorial. The 1% love AI and want people to love it, and aren’t using it as a distraction for the masses. If anything AI is helping some people realize the direct cause of their problems, the rich.
I find this message to be counter productive at best.
This same argument can be extended to literally any technology developed under capitalism which is what makes it nonsensical. The focus on technology is deeply misguided because this is fundamentally a social problem.
Hard disagree. Even if AI was developed in a hypothetical utopian communist state, the ethical, artistic and especially environmental concerns would still be legitimate reasons to be anti AI.
If someone is against ai and they do it for reasons other than socialism, that’s a win in my book.
What’s legitimate is inherently subjective. Yet, what we do see objectively is that people living in a socialist society overwhelmingly welcome this technology.
Have nuance. You are correct. But also not. AI is simply one of the means of production which means that it will inherently change labor relations. This is what OP is talking about. Being anti AI for the sake of being anti AI is dumb. Being anti AI because it is being used to prop up a dying parasite class is a more balanced point of view. That is the point of the post (not communicated very well though).
I think that there are legitimate reasons to criticize AI outside of the sphere of socialism, and that if people are against AI that’s a win in my book.
This is a distraction from the real problems AI is causing, and is ignoring a direct connection between AI and the people in power.
These are not two separate issues, they are one in the same. Saying that people are just trying to distract us by making us afraid of AI is conspiratorial. The 1% love AI and want people to love it, and aren’t using it as a distraction for the masses. If anything AI is helping some people realize the direct cause of their problems, the rich.
I find this message to be counter productive at best.
This same argument can be extended to literally any technology developed under capitalism which is what makes it nonsensical. The focus on technology is deeply misguided because this is fundamentally a social problem.
Hard disagree. Even if AI was developed in a hypothetical utopian communist state, the ethical, artistic and especially environmental concerns would still be legitimate reasons to be anti AI.
If someone is against ai and they do it for reasons other than socialism, that’s a win in my book.
What’s legitimate is inherently subjective. Yet, what we do see objectively is that people living in a socialist society overwhelmingly welcome this technology.
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/26/world/china-ai-nepal-tibet-flood.html
Gross.
Ah yes, my western chauvinist opinions are the only right ones.
You’re trying to say AI is a good thing. That’s gross.
Have you considered that I don’t really care what some ignoramus on the internet thinks?
At least I don’t have to get a robot owned by the oligarchs to think for me.
Have nuance. You are correct. But also not. AI is simply one of the means of production which means that it will inherently change labor relations. This is what OP is talking about. Being anti AI for the sake of being anti AI is dumb. Being anti AI because it is being used to prop up a dying parasite class is a more balanced point of view. That is the point of the post (not communicated very well though).
I think that there are legitimate reasons to criticize AI outside of the sphere of socialism, and that if people are against AI that’s a win in my book.
Elaborate please.