67

Greetings Hexbears!

I just pounded out this long ass comment in a thread inquiring about why leftists tend to oppose GenAI and LLMs, when I realized the post was already over a week old and no one will probably read it. Thought it was insightful enough to reshare and, given your reputation, figured people here would find it interesting to read.

I recently finished reading Capital, and many of these thoughts jumped out at me during my reading. Interested in hearing what you think or if you have any critiques or addendums.

Anyways, here's the text:

I haven’t seen any comments here that adequately address the core of the issue from a leftist perspective, so I will indulge.

LLMs are fundamentally a tool to empower capital and stack the deck against workers. This is a structural problem, and as such, is one that community efforts like FOSS are ill-equipped to solve.

Given that training LLMs from scratch requires massive computational power, you must control some means of production. i.e. You must own a server farm to scrape publicly accessible data or collect data from hosting user services. Then you must also own a server farm equipped with large arrays of GPUs or TPUs to carry out the training and most types of inference.

So the proletariat cannot simply wield these tools for their own purposes, they must use the products that capital allows to be made available (i.e. proprietary services or pre-trained “open source” models)

Then comes the fact that the core market for these “AI” products is not end users; it is capitalists. Capitalists who hope their investments will massively pay off by cutting labor costs on the most expensive portion of the proletariat: engineers, creatives, and analysts.

Even if “AI” can never truly replace most of these workers, it can convince capitalists and their manager servants to lay off workers, and it can convince workers that their position is more precarious due to pressure from the threat of replacement, discouraging workers for fighting for increased pay and benefits and better working conditions.

As is the case with all private private property, profits made by “AI” and LLM models will never reach the workers that built those models, nor the users who provided the training data. It will be repackaged as a product owned by capital and resold to the workers, either through subscription fees, token pricing, or through forfeiture of private data.

Make no mistake, once the models are sufficiently advanced, tools sufficiently embedded into workflows, and the market sufficiently saturated, the rug will be pulled, and “enshittification” will begin. Forcing workers to pay exorbitant prices for these tools in a market where experience and skills are highly commoditized and increasingly difficult to acquire.

The cherry on top is that “AI” is the ultimate capital. The promise of “AI” is that capitalists will be able to use the stolen surplus value from workers to eliminate the need for variable capital (i.e. workers) entirely. The end goal is to convert the whole of the proletariat into maximally unskilled labor, i.e. a commodity, so they can be maximally exploited, with the only recourse being a product they control the distribution of. AI was never going to be our savior, as it is built with the intent of being our enslaver.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] altkey@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

AI is also an ideal replacement for a middle-manager fall guy you can pin everything on, with an agency of something divine.

Massive layofs, market tilts, monopolization, corner cutting, targeted incarcerations, media manipulation, warcrimes, probably everything can be explained with it's Will and Presence. AI is a source of unchallenged power passed to capitalists by the Algorythm. And it's integration in many systems is not unlike some state&church honeymoon phase.

And although I myself and many dismiss it as too junky for our own workflow, ehem, the junkiness is on point. LLM works in misterious ways, you know, with all it's weights, and it's not an outdated dude-on-a-cloud but our cool pure math! And that techno-teo-fascism spreads like cancer.

I'm not well versed in marxism yet, but from my knowledge of history of RE\USSR and arguments against state religion, they line up nicely with AI hype too.

  1. Russian church held a monopoly on affordable education for the masses, only nobles could choose prestige education without indocrination - introduction of SOMEONE's AI into classrooms, eradication of useful information on the internet in general, putting headshots on public academia by opening a box of LLMandora on them too;
  2. Russian church was a source of power for the crown and vice versa. Sometimes it stuffed the deck of it's narrative to support the king and influence the masses, but there were decades where the church was the sole biggest landowner challenging their might too. Proto-lobbyism, the god-given power to rule and overly abundant stonk rubles taking the charge!

IAopium for the masses.

this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2025
67 points (100.0% liked)

technology

23917 readers
441 users here now

On the road to fully automated luxury gay space communism.

Spreading Linux propaganda since 2020

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS