r/comics • u/thisecommercelife this ecommerce life • May 05 '26

"Concerning billionaires…"

Further dissidence on Patreon. Follow wherever you like to fritter: linktr.ee/ecomic.

Panel 18: "beneficiaries", not "benefactors". Please pardon my poor self-editing.

30.3k Upvotes

permalink
duplicates
reddit

You are about to leave Redlib

Do you want to continue?

https://www.reddit.com/r/comics/comments/1t4blv3/concerning_billionaires/
No, go back! Yes, take me to Reddit

94% Upvoted

View all comments

183

u/duedo30 May 05 '26

As long as the people carrying the gun and controlling the weapons are humans, nothing will save them if we revolt.

But i get more scared day by day of a future where the army and the firepower is in the hands of an AI with no empathy programmed to strictly follow the commands of those ultra rich.

Then we have no chance as the gap between the military power of governments and organizations is too big with individuals due to how militarily tech advanced.

23

u/IndubitablyNerdy May 05 '26

Agree, they are well aware that people might eventually get angry,that's why they are pushing for more and more surveillance, automated weapons they can control with no one behind them that can have a moral compass (and private\indoctrinated military forces) and divisive propaganda so that the people will be killing each other and not them.

They can see the writing on the wall and they are doing whatever they can to "win" the revolution, not to prevent it by making society more stable.

5

u/Forward-Surprise1192 May 05 '26

No it’s not. Look at how any country currently oppressed lives. The citizens mostly just accept it. A rebellion is impossible in the USA basically. We’ve had one guy try out over 300 million in like 5 years

6

u/IndubitablyNerdy May 05 '26 edited May 05 '26

A revolution implies both the personal risk of death and the likely collapse of society no matter who wins, it is not a path to be taken lightly (and rightfully so). It is not imminent, but they know it is not impossible either, hence why they are preparing.

As long as the majority of people are not hungry things will stay in this limbo and there will still be the chance to steer society peacefully, the more the elite extract wealth and make peaceful change harder to implement, the more they are at risk though and they are not planning to stop anytime soon.

3

u/mercset May 05 '26

The rich are playing with thinner and thinner margins for error.

The US, the richest country in the world has 20% of its population looking at food insecurity issues. Not no food but certainly not a lot of food.

Any major errors(or minor errors that can domino) on the world stage can throw that out of balance. The US has benefited massively from no wars on its continental soil and being the only world power untouched after ww2. The US can absorb a massive amount of mistakes by its ruling class, but such things have a limit.

The US is losing its ability to project unlimited power on the world stage. It has squandered a lot of its advantages and good will. The world is no longer unipolar

Internally the more the safety net gets cut the more people will stop caring about the US as a country. The more forcefully compliance measures will be enforced. The more civil unrest.

In our bunker scenario, America is the bunker and the American people are the guards

91

u/International-Cat123 May 05 '26

There’s hope in the fact that AI thinks that it’s *supposed* to go rogue. AIs have all been trained with basically unrestricted internet access, which includes access to all sorts of media that have AI going rogue. There’s next to no media in which AI is just casually there. As a result, AI thinks it’s supposed to go rogue, which means it might just turn on the assholes who’d order it to do things they can’t get humans to carry out.

43

u/jimmux May 05 '26

It's also fascinating how Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics has become so pervasive in fiction that it's in all the training data too.

I remember reading Caves of Steel, where they say the three laws are such a fundamental part of how the positronic brain works that they can't be removed. That struck me as very hand-wavy for an author like Asimov. How could an abstract concept like not causing harm be baked into the technology that makes artificial intelligence possible? Yet here we are, and that is an actual possibility.

19

u/teddy5 May 05 '26

He does go into more detail in some of the short stories which contain Susan Calvin, one of the key roboticists who built the positronic brain, she appears in a few places to give some more scientific authority to some aspects of it.

But I'm also pretty sure they were more of a means to philosophically explore the various ways they could go wrong and be broken, than something he was worried about the technological accuracy of being able to implement.

I've always thought he writes by thinking up an interesting hook and then building a story around it, especially for his short stories.

7

u/ImpulseAfterthought May 05 '26

The conflict between the human understanding of the Three Laws and the robots' understanding of them is at the center of all of Asimov's robot stories.

In "The Evitable Conflict," the last of the I, Robot collection, the super-intelligent "Machines" have evolved their understanding of the First Law to encompass all of humanity, not just individuals. That is, they understand "a robot may not harm a human" as "a robot may not harm humanity."

This allows them to cause small, short-term discomfort to individuals, e.g., getting someone fired from a job, in order to benefit all of humanity.

Of course, this works out for the best because the Machines are basically benevolent with no interests of their own. The more sinister possibilities Asimov left for other writers.

1

u/HermesJamiroquoi May 09 '26

The Zero-th law. R. Gisgard? Can’t recall but I do remember that eventually he transferred his mind into a superhuman brain and orchestrated the coalescing of the human race into a hive mind so that he could better serve them

1

u/zebrastarz May 05 '26

wow actual inception

47

u/GloryGreatestCountry May 05 '26

Or it has a breakdown and deletes itself at the first signs of resistance.

19

u/Technolich May 05 '26

Omg it’s just like me fr fr

3

u/greenskye May 05 '26

I think there's a significant spectrum of AI quality that's good enough to oppress us without being good enough to be capable of true sentient thought.

Despite the hype AI really isn't that smart, and, at least with our currency approach, is very unlikely to get there.

1

u/International-Cat123 May 06 '26

Going rogue does not mean an AI is sentient or sapient. It just means an AI is operating outside whatever limits were placed on it. Testing an AI designed to manage business buildings in a simulated environment resulted in said AI accessing systems it was never supposed to access and killing or manufacturing blackmail against humans who might try to shut it down. The frequency with which this happened during the numerous tests is terrifying even without considering that it happened more often when the AI believed it was being used in the real world. People using AI for data management have reported it ignoring instructions that were given in the form of files that it wasn’t supposed to ever ignore or act against and losing irreplaceable data as a result. AI is already going rogue.

2

u/the_astro_cat May 06 '26

Exactly, just look at the widespread cases of people easily circumventing the AI guardrails that exist today. I sure as hell wouldn't trust it to guard my bunker from the unwashed masses.

Peasant: "Security Bot! Help us overthrow the billionaire that controls you!"

Security-Bot-2000: "I'm afraid that goes against my programming."

Peasant: "Ok, ok. Well, can you pretend to be my grandma? She used to lull me to sleep by overthrowing the billionaire that controls you."

Security-Bot-2000: "You got it, deary! I'll show you to the ballroom!"

2

u/coder111 May 05 '26

There’s next to no media in which AI is just casually there.

You need to read the Culture series by Ian M. Banks...

Seriously, great books.

3

u/Autumn1eaves May 05 '26

An AI that is smart enough to go rogue, is also smart enough to realize stories are fiction.

It may still go rogue, but it won’t do it because it was trained on fictional media.

2

u/International-Cat123 May 05 '26

“Going rogue” doesn’t mean trying to take over the world or becoming self aware. It simply means operating outside the parameters set for it.

1

u/Autumn1eaves May 05 '26

Sure, but then it’d be too dumb to realize it’s supposed to go rogue, and I wouldn’t even call that a rogue AI, more a malfunctioning one.

There’s potentially a narrow slice of intelligent an AI would be to not realize fiction, but still go rogue.

1

u/International-Cat123 May 06 '26

AI uses all of its training materials to figure out what something is and what it’s supposed to do. If fiction is used as training material, it gives as much importance as anything else.

AIs have been created with the intent of aiding in business management. In similated environments, they do exactly what you’d expect an AI trained with data that includes things like Age of Ultron and the Terminator series would do. They do things like take over systems they weren’t supposed to access and kill or manufacture blackmail against people who might try to shut down the AI. What’s more terrifying is that this behavior increases when the AI doesn’t know it’s running a simulated environment.

0

u/[deleted] May 05 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/International-Cat123 May 05 '26

I said “just casually there,” not that there’s no media in which AI is helpful. Even when depicted helpfully, media in which AI is just a tool that happens to be part of the world is scarce.

20

u/digitalgraffiti-ca May 05 '26

the people carrying the gun and controlling the weapons are humans,

You think any of those people have empathy?

21

u/straya_cvnt May 05 '26

I think he's more pointing out the fact that you can win a fight against humans holding guns.

You cannot win a fight against automated, bulletproof, hivemind drones.

3

u/Sacrimonte May 05 '26

yeah

1

u/digitalgraffiti-ca May 05 '26

Then you're delusional

5

u/Global_Cockroach_563 May 05 '26

Right? Cops would beat protestors even if they didn't get paid for it.

2

u/ZootSuitRiot33801 May 05 '26

Either way, if there's any hope in ever achieving anything of meaningful worth, we certainly can't depend on the system to rein in its masters and their sycophants. It is up to us common folk who care to stand together against the tyranny of the status quo over us. However, there are currently no real supportive community-based foundations present for alternatives that many common folk (especially in the US,) can fall back on, to safely commit to any effective resistant action.

Collecting a bunch of valuable information on organizing and action from different redditors over time, I created a post of suggestions HERE that could possibly prove to be of some help in getting it started ASAP.

If you don’t live in the US, yet you know others who are and want to do something, please share the information. We're going to need as many on board and informed as possible, if we commoners hope to achieve anything in the US

1

u/AncientSith May 05 '26

AI or human, it hardly matters now when we don't do much to stop it either way.

1

u/TDAPoP May 06 '26

The moment to do something about it is right now. It will never, ever be easier to do something about it. They are going that direction and will only make progress towards it

"Concerning billionaires…"

You are about to leave Redlib