Anonymous #1 3w

Wdym

1

Anonymous OP 3w

What I mean is that the clear solution to our problems are not wasteful and destructive AI systems, but sustainability and socialist practices rn.

1

Anonymous #1 3w

While AI as it’s used right now is neutral at best, I foresee it being beneficial in the future. Sustainability, scaling large and implementing socialist policies need not scaling down. In fact, to create a socialist or post-scarcity world we want; thinking in large scales is necessary

4

Anonymous OP 3w

I was thinking physically scaling things and our actipns down/the opposite of late stage capitalism.

0

Anonymous #1 3w

Elaborate please

3

Anonymous #4 3w

i honestly can’t tell if this is bait or genuine sentiment

1

Anonymous #2 3w

So you’re saying the current system requires coercion to function

-1

Anonymous #5 3w

people are not altruistic enough to be content with a bed and a hot meal identical to everyone else if their work is not the same. if you think that’s coercion then alright.

0

Anonymous #2 3w

You have a strange vision of the possible alternative systems lol. Why wouldn’t the people doing the hard labor be rewarded MORE by society to incentivize them?

0

Anonymous #3 3w

Do you have sources for this or are you just speculating?

1

Anonymous #5 3w

bc everyone is equal and gets the same things. unfair for someone to get more or everyone is gonna want the ditch digger jobs

0

Anonymous #2 3w

Who said everyone has to get the exact same things? Most people have a sense of fairness that would make them feel ok about letting the people doing the tougher jobs have a bit more

0

Anonymous #2 3w

Not everyone would want the ditch digger jobs because that’s hard labor

0

Anonymous #5 3w

this is just wrong lol. people look down on blue collar work now and turn their noses at such occupations. some people grasp some labor is worth more than other. but idek that i’d bet on most. huge disconnect in what the individual is willing and wants to do, and how the value is perceived. vs work they would never do and see it as worthless bc they would never do it. there is no reconciling that

0

Anonymous #2 3w

Yeah there is reconciling that lol, because it’s a cultural problem not an intrinsic human one

0

Anonymous #5 3w

I don’t have it in me rn to go searching for real studies, but maybe I’ll come back to it later anecdotally, have you ever seen what happens when people leave bowls of candy out for trick or treaters without specifying how much they’re allowed to take?

1

Anonymous #5 3w

Also to be clear I know there are communities that exist without money, but not at the scale of a modern nation

1

Anonymous #3 3w

Yeah and it seems to turn out differently depending on the neighborhood lol, I think it’s a cultural thing

1

Anonymous #3 3w

Well I would be curious to read what you’ve read if you’re willing to come back to it

1

Anonymous #3 3w

Have you read any of David Graeber’s works by any chance? He talks about how credit came before money, and bartering really only came after money

1

Anonymous #5 3w

I mean to a degree I think you’re right about it being cultural, but I don’t think that affects my point much. Because the vast majority of the time cultural change - and especially not altruistic change - cannot be effected from the top down

1

Anonymous #3 3w

Or again, not without extreme restrictions on how people can engage with the system in the transitional period

1

Anonymous #3 3w

For sure, the cultural change has to be done from the ground up through local and community based change I think. Which will be hard and take a lot of work but I think it can be done

4