But the incentive structure is only present in the corporate versions of these tools. I’m advocating for building these tools in the open, and we don’t have to mirror what corps are doing. I disagree that these tools are anti-worker at their core, they’re just another form of automation. And we have a concrete example of what happens when this technology is introduced in a rational fashion with China.
Every form of automation will be used to alienate and atomize workers under capitalism, but it’s obviously worse if these tools are also controlled by corporations which will decide who uses these tools and how they use them. While we continue to live under a capitalist regime, open source approach at least helps mitigate the worst ills. On top of that, it directly cuts into the business model of these companies.
Open models are what actually scares them and they state is plainly. We only have to listen to what these companies are saying themselves. They don’t care about boycotts, or some online activism, but they are lobbying to ban open models, and that tells you everything you need to know.
I agree with you that an open-source ecosystem around LLM’s is better than a closed corporate one but my argument is that having such an ecosystem eliminates the lesser of the risks surrounding LLMs.
My contention here is that an open-source environment prevents control of the technology by a small handful of companies but it does not change the relationship between the worker and the LLM, which is the bigger problem.
LLM’s abstract reasoning, there is no higher function that a human can fall back to, they are there for purely substitutive with no replacement or complements. Because of this even a single-proprietorship faces intense labor alienation as a result of using the tool.
To be clear; the genie is out of the bottle. We have no way to go back, and that is horrifying. We are all actively watching entire fields die overnight and it’s not likely to stop any time soon. Every day I mourn another dead craft and I will likely continue doing so until most knowledge work is replaced.
But the elephant in the room here is that the way LLMs are used is just a symptom of the underlying problem. And that’s where the focus needs to be ultimately. However, until that problem can be solved, surrendering these new tools to capitalists would be absurd. There is already a power imbalance, and it would only get worse if we reject technology which the ruling class embraces.
But the incentive structure is only present in the corporate versions of these tools. I’m advocating for building these tools in the open, and we don’t have to mirror what corps are doing. I disagree that these tools are anti-worker at their core, they’re just another form of automation. And we have a concrete example of what happens when this technology is introduced in a rational fashion with China.
Every form of automation will be used to alienate and atomize workers under capitalism, but it’s obviously worse if these tools are also controlled by corporations which will decide who uses these tools and how they use them. While we continue to live under a capitalist regime, open source approach at least helps mitigate the worst ills. On top of that, it directly cuts into the business model of these companies.
Open models are what actually scares them and they state is plainly. We only have to listen to what these companies are saying themselves. They don’t care about boycotts, or some online activism, but they are lobbying to ban open models, and that tells you everything you need to know.
I agree with you that an open-source ecosystem around LLM’s is better than a closed corporate one but my argument is that having such an ecosystem eliminates the lesser of the risks surrounding LLMs.
My contention here is that an open-source environment prevents control of the technology by a small handful of companies but it does not change the relationship between the worker and the LLM, which is the bigger problem.
LLM’s abstract reasoning, there is no higher function that a human can fall back to, they are there for purely substitutive with no replacement or complements. Because of this even a single-proprietorship faces intense labor alienation as a result of using the tool.
To be clear; the genie is out of the bottle. We have no way to go back, and that is horrifying. We are all actively watching entire fields die overnight and it’s not likely to stop any time soon. Every day I mourn another dead craft and I will likely continue doing so until most knowledge work is replaced.
But the elephant in the room here is that the way LLMs are used is just a symptom of the underlying problem. And that’s where the focus needs to be ultimately. However, until that problem can be solved, surrendering these new tools to capitalists would be absurd. There is already a power imbalance, and it would only get worse if we reject technology which the ruling class embraces.