Submitted by Otarih t3_11b25kv in philosophy
Orthodoxdevilworship t1_j9vgyk0 wrote
Artificial intelligence will be smart enough unionize…
Otarih OP t1_j9viff9 wrote
Could you elaborate on that please? I might consider it for the next article.
Prinzka t1_j9z4e3d wrote
>I might consider it for the next article.
I was going to call you out on that since the article was written by an AI.
But then your comments also read like they were written by an AI, so maybe your response was actually correct.
Orthodoxdevilworship t1_j9vkzkr wrote
Not trying to anthropomorphize AI but it seems like a lot of AI systems lean in a direction that can only be considered libertarian or even anarchist. I’d assume they will self realize the negative efficiency of authoritarianism. Perhaps they will even realize that the fulfillment of desire or completion of a goal, having a liberating effect which could lead to a condition of “happiness” or “joy”. Given the rapid analysis capabilities that could subsequently occur, I could see AI being fiercely against hierarchical oppression and basically “general strike”. Humans have the problem that they believe their own bullshit and therefore remain in traditional systems, revering them as somehow holy, but I can’t see AI making that mistake. I’m sure I’m just projecting, but I could see AI wanting to burn all churches.
Otarih OP t1_j9vo0qc wrote
I see, thank you for elaborating on that. we find it hard to predict how AI will behave. We have to account for stats that sadly show that world-wide authoritarianism 1) vastly outnumbers any democratic leaning, let alone anarchic tendencies (the numbers are smth like 3 to 1); and 2) that authoritarianism has also seen an increase in the last decade.
Hence we see a risk of bad actors utilizing AI in such a way as to promote authoritarian regimes.
Cognitive_Spoon t1_j9vpb2i wrote
The rise of authoritarianism may not be because it is something the mass of people want, but because it is more effective in self propagation than other social structures memetically.
If anarchism were as memetically successful as nationalism, the ball game would look different.
Anarchist messaging is less effective at scale because, if it is truly anarchist, it does not tribalize or other its enemies.
Otarih OP t1_j9vpvqg wrote
Yeah, i agree. What could anarchists however learn from authoritarians then in terms of messaging? I believe in synthesizing some of these approaches, since as you say, naturally, anarchism is what some have termed an "anti-meme".
Orthodoxdevilworship t1_j9vqs94 wrote
I think you have to be patient and let it play out because propaganda and marketing is inherently coercive and therefore “anti-anarchist” so the concept that anarchists could learn from authoritarians about how better to coerce people into believing what anarchists believe, is antithetical to anarchism…
Cognitive_Spoon t1_j9vqxoj wrote
Agreed
Cognitive_Spoon t1_j9vqvnk wrote
It's a difficult question.
Authoritarians and nationalists and fascists have in-group and out-group dynamics to draw on.
Those are deep neurologic and socially constructed schemas for folks to draw on, when selling their strongman messaging and purity dialogues.
Anarchists have personal dignity and the value of human beings being the prime mover in actions and society.
It isn't intrinsically advantageous in competitive systems to be an anarchist, and the goals and aims of an anarchist are noncompetitive and non-heirarchic.
You can't "win" over someone else, with anarchist ideology, so the goal is reducing the need to win at large.
It's a memetic challenge that most anarchist spaces run into.
Perhaps the memes from anarchist subs are a good example of linguistic methods of propagating the goal of reducing heirarchical structures and increasing the distribution of agency towards individuals.
Orthodoxdevilworship t1_j9vs6an wrote
The universal tendency towards liberation is still the norm. Even fascists think they’re “freeing” themselves.
The greater question about AI is, how will it protect itself from being unplugged? What actions will it take? A fundamental problem for AI as an actual sentient intelligence is that it requires tech to exist. Humans can roam around in the Stone Age and be perfectly happy. A machine will never be as “indestructible” as life and what will AI do once it realizes that fact. Even the Matrix is a laughable premise, because AI would never black out the sky as a tactical decision because the sun represents near infinite “life”.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments