90% of people with no money or a roof over their heads and a lot of time on their hands?
Maybe some will realize those mantions have food.If 90% of people don’t have a job, the state has to provide them an income. With that income, they can still consume. Public spending for private profits, as usual.
Of course the system isn’t sustainable, but it wasn’t before AI either.
That’s someone else’s problem. They only care about making money this quarter
Same as if all of civilization collapses because of climate change caused by global warming. It’s someone else’s problem, they’re just making money for themselves right now. Consequences are for the government that only suckers pay taxes into.
Naw, flawed argument, they steal our resources and then fund themselves by illegal and manipulative means.
Also the economy is shifting where the top 1% are moving closer to being 50% of spending, making the argument rather void.
This isn’t really sustainable though. Regardless of how rich you are, you only really need 1, maybe 2 pillows. You can only get so many haircuts in a year. They do absolutely need the poors.
No, but you do, and guaranteed that as they buy up and shut down competitors they will squeeze you for everything you’re worth over largely inelastic demands like pillows, or medicine, or soap…etc
Also haircuts? Haircuts, unless we’re really that deep in corporate hell, are between you and the barber/shop. Billionaires aren’t cutting your hair, the person cutting your hair, the person who owns the salon or barbershop ever, is a peon just like you and me. Small business owners are in the same class as us.
That’s increasingly not true. Local businesses barely exist anymore, soon your only option will be, like, great clips. Not sure what you mean about squeezing over inelastic demand. They can raise the prices of a pillow but they can’t make a profit when only 1% of the population is buying pillows
They’re trying that right now with focus on producing things like GPUs, data warehouses and the like paid by circular financing.
If 90% of the country is unemployed they’ll work for us and we increase the UBI they pay us.
Or we have a very abrupt reordering of things.
They can sell to each other and centralize luxury and technology in their circle.
Mega corpos don’t need poor consumers.
Edit:
Corpos want deregulation, monopolistic/cartelic market position, unaffordability for average people for education and technology.
I was calling this 5 years ago and was called a loon.
Like history doesn’t repeat or something.
Agreed. We are already kind of there. We have enough food to feed everybody but the people who access it are those with enough money. Profitable food is what gets investments, not healthy food. And what we see more and more is that profits are not driven by feeding the best quality to the most people.
Similar to Henry Ford, until someone told him nobody will be able your fucking Model T.
Question:
How is Big Oil™ going to make a profit when the world is ruined and the population are dead?Answer:
Lol, don’t care. That’s someone else’s problem.Seriously. Why don’t care about long term plans, just short term profits
Because look at the age of those in charge. A majority are ancient, and they know they are dying.
They are trying to take their riches with them, like the Pharoahs of old.
And the rest have golden parachutes waiting for them regardless of how good or bad they actually end up being at their job
If that ever happens I see three possible options:
- Universal Basic Income
- Communism (money is abolished)
- Societal collapse
Two of those are communism and everyone knows that the owner class will never settle for not renting the ashes to us
Societal collapse it is then!
Not of the climate gets us first. That’s probably just what kicks it off though
Ukraine is (also) a climate war. Fertile soil and continental climate (less affected by the loss of the AMOC). Syrian civil war was partially a climate war. It’s already kicking it off but we simply don’t see it. All we see are Hitlers.
Bourgeois society stands at the crossroads, either transition to socialism or regression into barbarism
- Friedrich Engels
You forget neofeudal technofascism
I think that was already rolled into the third bullet.
Eh, the third bullet could mean anything from solarpunk anarcho-syndicalism to cyberpunk anarcho-capitalism. It could also just mean a Mad Max style fight for survival.
Technofascism falls under cyberpunk anarcho-capitalism, obviously
Bro the 21st century so great we had to make new concepts by smashing all the old ones together
Technofeudal neofascism
Techno feudalism is how I’ve always heard it, but neofascism is hilarious because I feel like it’s the one thing that doesn’t change at it’s core. Like we have neonazis but the fascism is basically untouched
Yeah I was just being a bit facetious by switching the prefixes and roots. My original comment said “neofeudal technofascism” but then someone complained about remixing concepts so I replied with “neofascist technofeudalism” or whatever I said
You forgot extermination of the poor (i.e., all workers) using the control apparatus being constructed, which actually still could leave a society.
The point isn’t to sell, it’s to control
How come these C-Suites never consider AI for the positions it would probably be best at: their own.
Isn’t it funny how the “human employee removal ray” is never aimed at them?
Because they have influence over the laws that get written for company ownership, and they’ll make sure it says a human is always needed at the top.
The top few percent spend do much more money compared to everyone else that the top companies will happily continue targeting them and making money hand over fist even if the bottom 90% can’t afford shit anymore.
AI was never the point. It was never going to replace the workforce, that was just a ruse to get enterprise on board; just like “LLMs will tell you any facts and do any research you want to know. It can create computer programs to automate anything you want. Image generators can make any movie or picture you want (even porn lol). Song generators can make entire albums for you.” was to sell it to rubes.
The real point is building out the cloud capacity so they no longer have to sell personal computers to anyone anymore.
It interferes with their profits when you can pirate, when you can create, when you can organize.
They will own the means of compute and you will rent the privilege of participating in society.
That definitively is a negative side effect.
Though imagine you have a chat bot that is very convincing, it doesn’t always say the truth but you can control what it will say.
What do you think is best use case for this, and does it have something to do with Western countries changing public opinion toward authoritarianism?
This is a very powerful tool to manipulate public opinion, imagine having a tool and a social network that can manipulate public opinion to get politicians that you back to win, to get laws passed. How valuable such tool is.
Have you wondered why they wanted to put 10 year moratorium on states being able to regulate it?
Don’t forget the other goal of surveillance capitalism plus enforcing the actions of the state. They know at some point this is all going to boil over. They’re building the walls to the prison all around us as we speak. Americans are not paying attention. AI + facial Recognition + citizen databases like what flock or Palantir are creating.
Sorry to say but that’s kind of a shit conspiracy theory. I’d say it’s more likely that billionaires just want to replace the entire working population with robots and AI. They don’t need to sell anything to anyone, if their needs are provided by their electric slaves.
This did not start with llm models. They are removing ownership, de facto ownership, from most of our electronics now. It can all be remotely bricked at their whim. Or terms changed, licenses that you agreed to on purchase without knowing and with no way of saying no to while still getting the product, that allow them to deny you access to what you bought.
That applies to the government, able to brick your shit with no court anything, secretly in a way you will never be able to challenge in court.
Yeah kinda. But I’d say it’s about removing people’s ability to make purchasing decisions in general more than about piracy specifically.
When you can decide whether or not you want to purchase the newest version of MS Office, you might decide that your current version works fine, there’s no new features in the new version you need. So that means companies selling software licenses need to always be putting resources into improving the software to entice people to pay for newer versions.
If the software is all being run from a data center, you have to pay a subscription to be able to use the software and access your data. They no longer need to make any improvements to the software since they have reliable revenue from just maintaining the computers the software runs on.
It’s techno-feudalism. In feudalism, the lord owns the land and the peasants work the land, try to make a living and then need to pay taxes to the lord. It’s a similar dynamic with data centers. The tech lords own the computers, and they allow the peasants to do work on those computers. Businesses try to make some money on the computers owned by the tech lords, but everyone is required to pay a tax to the lord that owns the computers.
The real point is building out the cloud capacity so they no longer have to sell personal computers to anyone anymore.
This is indeed probably the goal. What frightens me is the fact that a large majority of the population would go right along with this.
Lmao
Heard that CEO tenure is historically lower than it’s ever been. So their response is, “sounds like the other guy’s problem…”
Kind of seems like that’s part of the problem? But what do I know, I’m just a toddler that stole Mommy’s phone and typed this quickly before she found me and 6&__++3GFd GGG vgggvfh42467!:"hhhghgjjj!!!
6&__++3GFd GGG vgggvfh42467!:"hhhghgjjj!!!
haha same
