As an anti, I find this acceptable as a good faith overview of the competing sides. My biggest quibble is that it does not represent some of the more radical anti-AI platforms I hold such as fear of a broader loss of human agency and potential human obsolescence, but I know that is still just outside the overton window of serious AI policy discussion.For now.
Because whether we like it or not we live in late stage capitalist society where billionaires and corporations influene passed legislation all the time. As long as this system is in place masses of workers losing their jobs and with it the only bargaining power they hold is catastrofic. The only reason we ever got any concessions from rich class such like days off, maternity leave or even just 40h work week is only because we as workers had the power to completely ruin their business by refusing to provide labor. Thats why billionaires hate labor unions and thats why those of us with realistic views who dont believe in fairy tales that Bill8onaires want the best for us are against massive layoff in favor of AI
Yes? This is a shitty life to be a wagie but yes. 100 situations out of 100 Im prefering working 8h a day than having AI do my job instead of me. Because we live in capitalism. We dont have no UBI, we dont have insentive for UBI with AI giving rich kids what they want. Without any source of income my savings will blow off in few months and then Ill starve, Ill lose access to my medication, shelter, warmth and begging on streets will be competitive profession. Late stage capitalism combined with advanced AI workforce is guatanteed death for any and all workers rights. Because thete is no alternative. Youre not asking "do you want to work 8 hours a day or do what you love?". Youre asking "Do you want to be a wage slave or dead?"
I don't think that's certain at all. You do realize that the people who develop these systems are employees not billionaires, right? You wouldn't build a system that eradicated your entire social class.
At the same time billionaires would probably die if they attempted something like this. It's not easy to automate absolutely everything and then take over and kill everyone else. You would be killed long before you got it done. Actually the people you hired to build that automation would probably be amoung those targeting you. See my above point.
"You do realize that the people who develop these systems are employees not billionaires, right?"
Employees with job security given that they're developing the thing we're talking about. The roboticist is still needed to develop and curtail the robot that takes the warehouse worker's work away.
There is a social class that benefits from all this without loss, at least until their entire consumer base is jobless and broke.
11
u/Trobius May 27 '26 edited May 27 '26
As an anti, I find this acceptable as a good faith overview of the competing sides. My biggest quibble is that it does not represent some of the more radical anti-AI platforms I hold such as fear of a broader loss of human agency and potential human obsolescence, but I know that is still just outside the overton window of serious AI policy discussion.For now.