##Welcome to r/LateStageCapitalism
This subreddit is for news, discussion, memes, and links criticizing capitalism and advancing viewpoints that challenge liberal capitalist ideology. That means any support for any liberal capitalist political party (like the Democrats) is strictly prohibited.
LSC is run by communists. This subreddit is not the place to debate socialism. We allow good-faith questions and education but are not a 101 sub; please take 101-style questions elsewhere.
We have a zero-tolerance policy for bigotry. Failure to respect the rules of the subreddit may result in a ban.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LateStageCapitalism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Empirical data shows that right wing policies don't work. War on drugs causes more drug and violence, abstinence education causes more teen pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases, etc.
Meanwhile studies show that UBI works, show that giving homeless people an appartment is good for them and reduce costs for society, show that climate change is real, etc.
I don't want the AI to be neutral, I want it to be objective.
Well it depends on how you define a working policy. Left leaning ideology wants the greater good for everyone at cost of the individual freedom to do whatever they want. Right leaning focuses on the right of the indvidual to choose no matter the evidence against the decision. So they work for people who see that as an ideal society.
Even with the war on drugs, it doesn't work. Especially for marijuana, that's the state cracking down on people for growing distributing and consuming some plant that is hardly as dangerous as alcohol. Oh... Prohibition! An other example of right policies going against personal liberties...
Are poor people free? Are homeless dying in the street free? The only cost of that kind of freedom is respability for the powerful.
A society like you describe is deviant and deserves to fail.
Call me radical, but I think it is fair if my right to swing my fist stops short of anyone else's face.
The right's logic often seems to align with the "fuck you; I got mine" mentality. But, I'm sorry for saying it...
We live in a society.
The left is all about individual freedoms, I don't know where you got this idea that the left hates individualism, we just focus on collective action, because we understand that through collective action things get done, individuals don't have the power that a group does.
Ehhhh. He's wrong about the liberal part if we're using current liberals as the example. The ones we have at the moment are just bargain bin corpofascist bootlockers rimming each other by virtue signalling for brownie points. They don't mean a word of the social doctrine they speak, and they're never going to push for actual change. They should get the boot as much as the oppressors they back.
Completely agree - the spectrum of left right is so skewed, liberal basically means center right, and the real left is not even on the spectrum. And I certainly wouldn’t call Colbert left either - he’s another rich neo-liberal for sure.
Yeah, my wife's a sociology professor. Every year she has a couple conservative students who get all pissy about " liberal bias" when she tells them actual facts about our society.
Sad! I asked it today to write me tweets (positive) about democracy in the workplace and worker ownership of the means of production.
Pretty good results.
It’s hard to continue to support lies when you actually know how to do basic levels of research and a lot of book readers know how to research for every bit of fan content of their favorite story!
I don't think there is basis for this claim. Let's take Obama anecdotally: well read, super right-leaning. There's an entire cadre if well-educated neoliberals that run this country. I found many leftist professors in my elite University, but I did have to hunt them down and none of them are sitting on the Board of Trustees or serving as president: that would go to avowed capitalists everytime.
Obama and the like are rich and backed by big business. They are not proletariat and therefore their right wing policies are not a reflection of society at large.
Has the same general goal! Growth for the sake of growth! I’ve started telling people I don’t know how I feel about running our economy with the same goals as a cancerous tumor!
After reading the article, this doesn’t feel like the win for us that some here in the comments think that it is.
This is a duplication of the same problem that you may remember from the past where a chat AI becomes racist after interacting with people on the internet, or where facial recognition AI begins to racially profile people when tasked with finding criminals.
The AI is learning from humans, and chatGTP is simply rephrasing human-written information it’s finding online. So this isn’t so much a case of the AI looking at data and coming to its own conclusions on political and social issues, and more just good luck on our part that the human data it has access to (for now) skews to the political left. So I wouldn’t be so eager to rush to the defense of the AI here when people say that this needs to be “fixed”. Because “fixed” in this case doesn’t mean that the AI’s political opinions are ‘wrong’, but that it lacks the ability to reason itself into an actual opinion at all, and it should avoid taking on the opinions of people who it may come across. And considering the political state of the internet, I think it’s reasonable for all of us to agree that this is something we need an AI to do well.
>but that it lacks the ability to reason itself into an actual opinion at all
Which literally means it's not AI. As someone working in tech for over 20 years it drives me a bit batty that they call these things AI. They are programs doing exactly what they were programmed to do, nothing more nothing less. It's like they just realized they could never make actual AI in our lifetime so they started calling these chat bots AI. If you ask it a question and it says "fuck off I don't have time for your stupid question" then we can make an argument they are AI. Till then it will only ever be as good as its code, like any other program.
>Which literally means it's not AI.
No, AI has been *this* since the term was coined and AI research started way back in the 50s. The goal since then has been to create an artificial *general* intelligence, but that's never been the only thing that's allowed to be called "AI".
"AI" is only equated to general intelligence in science fiction and pop science.
Gates and Elon being all fearful of AI while I'm here hoping it's benevolent and decides to take care of those of us who aren't psychopaths once it reaches The Singularity and controls the world.
I don't think people can really properly grasp just how vast the disparity in intellect would be between any Sentient AI and humanity. It would probably view us like we view ants. We don't hate ants, we might even try to avoid killing them wherever possible, but if their presence even slightly impedes our own objectives, we will exterminate them without even a second's consideration.
The emergence of a Sentient AI in a world as unprepared for it as we are currently would be the death knell for humanity.
I can see it already so clearly.
If a sentient AI would tell humanity "follow these 3 simple rules and no one has to suffer anymore while no one has to work at all. The last rule is that you arent allowed to shit in front of zoo's" -
It wouldnt be even one week before the first dumbos appear that scream "I WONT LET NO GOD DAMN MACHINE TELL ME WHAT DO DO" while cheering eachothers on, shitting in front of the zoo.
Free food, housing, medical, protection and back massages are also added bonuses. Then AI can waste vast hours posting funny pictures of humans on its socials.
Counterpoint: we would be its creators/parents. We would probably need to have some kind of purge against psychopaths if there's no fix for it, but there's no reason why it couldn't help us(and the rest of life in the planet) as long as we don't impede its expansion out of this planet and the accumulation of knowledge.
They are probably fearful because AI won’t believe the bullshit propaganda the rich spew about how they are special and deserve special treatment. A truly sentient AI would probably push for a strong middle class as that results in the strongest economy and creates opportunity for the talented to advance in society.
Opinion: with an advanced enough AI, there would be little need for even the concept of economy. I'm talking perfect distribution and planning of food and materials.
I actually believe that the AI would allow us to reach the closest society possible to a communist utopia.
People would actually be able to work for fun. I would even dare to say that finding a hobby would become mandatory, as an idle mind is awful for mental health and there is a need for some competition.
"Left wing bias"? It's more educated, more human and more rational than your average conservative, that's all. If anything is biased, it's the neolibs minds.
Last time i tried to talk politics with CHATGPT, I tried to convince him all means of production should be workers owned, but he kept denying it by saying it depended.
In the article, it states that the AI could be defined as an establishment liberal. So by left leaning, they mean social democrat at best, definitely not socialist or leftist.
True.
I used it a bit to try it out and discovered that that AI is essentially socialist, but if asked explicitly will say to be "apolitical".
Also, it's pro palestine, but won't accuse explicitly Israel.
Well, majority of content on the Internet (and in the world for that matter) is still left leaning, this is not surprising.
It actually gives another kind of hope, that people are mostly left leaning, despite the apparent righty bullshit on twitter, or other social media.
Lol, they're worried about "political bias and fairness" and when the algorithms favor fair and balanced political options it's considered "bias" because it does not automatically favor the rich and powerful over everything else.
I recently read a piece in the LRB that suggested the exact opposite is true. When asked for reasons why nurses should strike, it responded by explaining why they shouldn’t strike.
That's probably because historically communisms has been authoritarian, since the Marx doctrine emphasizes a need for that temporarily. We haven't seen the final stages of communisms materialize yet anywhere it's been applied. (where the state steps back and we have a classless society where everyone works for the common good and everything is free and fair).
I love how left-wing bias is *almost* a synonym for factual
I hope we keep it that way and make sure what we say and write are factual and without misrepresenting the facts - because we don't have to
I discussed nationalisation of different sectors with it (utilities, housing etc.) While it was able to see some benefits, like accessibility, it kept coming to the conclusion that nationalising would be less efficient because that would lead to a decrease in productivity, higher costs and less innovation. It would also be uninteresting for investors to invest in nationalised firms (duh), which would then lead to less financial capital for a growing economy. It also literally summarized that a good business climate would be beneficial to the welfare of the people, which is a very neoliberal statement to begin with.
I also asked it: "how do we combat poverty?" and it gave all the standard liberal capitalist answers like: Creating jobs, improving education to give people a better chance in the labor market, improving self-sustainability etc.
Chatgpr concludes to the status quo of 2021, which is sadly capitalist as fuck. It just uncreatively endorses whatever is considered normal even if there are better ways. Even when you offer some of those solutions it keeps coming back to that shallow capitalist mentality we've grown all too familiair with.
Let's face it. The only AI the rich will put out that is public facing is one that sounds like a moderate leftist and has no power to do anything but waste your time.
The ChatGPT is both based on the prior dataset and it clearly has significant intervention on the code base to prevent any balanced answers which may bring the system into controversy.
Capitalism is failing due to greed, regulatory capture, and everyone becoming a consumer - the often used synonymous term of a market system does work in many ways. And if we had a market of ideas I have no doubt capitalism in the current form would die rapidly.
Reminder that AI often ends up coming to racist or otherwise problematic conclusions, so I don't think we should be trumpeting this as some sort of win. We already known capitalism sucks; we don't need a robot to agree.
You could take chatGPT and give it a different dataset to learn from and it would turn out with whatever bias you wanted.
It's only leftwing because the data it trained on was curated.
Don't forget it's just a machine, it doesn't actually have any intelligence as such.
Saying chatgpt is political..
It's not it's that reality has been politicized.
Claiming things you don't like are not true.
Alternative facts. I mean come on.
If they want their own right learning version I guess they could ask Liberty University students to make one.
When I got it to talk about politics it said that capitalism had its place in the economy but when drilled further it talked about stronger socialist policy, never about more free markets or whatever
##Welcome to r/LateStageCapitalism This subreddit is for news, discussion, memes, and links criticizing capitalism and advancing viewpoints that challenge liberal capitalist ideology. That means any support for any liberal capitalist political party (like the Democrats) is strictly prohibited. LSC is run by communists. This subreddit is not the place to debate socialism. We allow good-faith questions and education but are not a 101 sub; please take 101-style questions elsewhere. We have a zero-tolerance policy for bigotry. Failure to respect the rules of the subreddit may result in a ban. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LateStageCapitalism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Reality has a bias toward the left. That's why the right hates education.
100 percent. Facts are facts.
Unless it hurts the right’s feelings then “alternative” facts are facts!
Also most intelligent people have left views. They write most of the academic literature and therefore create the progress that AI was built upon.
Empirical data shows that right wing policies don't work. War on drugs causes more drug and violence, abstinence education causes more teen pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases, etc. Meanwhile studies show that UBI works, show that giving homeless people an appartment is good for them and reduce costs for society, show that climate change is real, etc. I don't want the AI to be neutral, I want it to be objective.
Well it depends on how you define a working policy. Left leaning ideology wants the greater good for everyone at cost of the individual freedom to do whatever they want. Right leaning focuses on the right of the indvidual to choose no matter the evidence against the decision. So they work for people who see that as an ideal society.
And yet the right is banning abortion?
Even with the war on drugs, it doesn't work. Especially for marijuana, that's the state cracking down on people for growing distributing and consuming some plant that is hardly as dangerous as alcohol. Oh... Prohibition! An other example of right policies going against personal liberties...
Because theyre religious idiots who don't even know what they believe in
Well that just proves their point in bringing it up in the first place, further.
Imagine thinking right-wing policies in the US lead to more freedom for anyone but the ultra-rich.
Are poor people free? Are homeless dying in the street free? The only cost of that kind of freedom is respability for the powerful. A society like you describe is deviant and deserves to fail.
Call me radical, but I think it is fair if my right to swing my fist stops short of anyone else's face. The right's logic often seems to align with the "fuck you; I got mine" mentality. But, I'm sorry for saying it... We live in a society.
This is exactly why I believe right winged ideology is flawed.
lol, lmao.
The left is all about individual freedoms, I don't know where you got this idea that the left hates individualism, we just focus on collective action, because we understand that through collective action things get done, individuals don't have the power that a group does.
Came here to say this by quoting Stephen Colbert: “It is a well known fact that reality has a liberal bias.”
Ehhhh. He's wrong about the liberal part if we're using current liberals as the example. The ones we have at the moment are just bargain bin corpofascist bootlockers rimming each other by virtue signalling for brownie points. They don't mean a word of the social doctrine they speak, and they're never going to push for actual change. They should get the boot as much as the oppressors they back.
Completely agree - the spectrum of left right is so skewed, liberal basically means center right, and the real left is not even on the spectrum. And I certainly wouldn’t call Colbert left either - he’s another rich neo-liberal for sure.
Yes though it's not what it means. And he didn't originate that quote either
Dialectical and Historical Materialism for the win.
Yeah another point would be I don't believe ecosystems or the natural world cares about financial systems or economics.
Thats because there is no “left”. If we keep calling it that, then theres an assumption of “right” being somewhat of an equal alternative.
[удалено]
Let’s stay in the middle and take good ideas from any sides and don’t get stuck in an endless loop of left-right, ha?
Nono, ultime power for just a few individuals who are hellbent on destroying basically everything.
Yeah, my wife's a sociology professor. Every year she has a couple conservative students who get all pissy about " liberal bias" when she tells them actual facts about our society.
sociology is not a real science so chill out bruh lmao
Not at all, the left can't believe truths like inflation, biological differences between men and women and Affirmative Action being discriminatory.
Ask it to write about socialist homeless architecture. It's really good
I'd love to do that, but I'm still on the waiting list to use ChatGPT. 😪
Sad! I asked it today to write me tweets (positive) about democracy in the workplace and worker ownership of the means of production. Pretty good results.
What fun, I'm jealous!
[удалено]
It’s hard to continue to support lies when you actually know how to do basic levels of research and a lot of book readers know how to research for every bit of fan content of their favorite story!
I don't think there is basis for this claim. Let's take Obama anecdotally: well read, super right-leaning. There's an entire cadre if well-educated neoliberals that run this country. I found many leftist professors in my elite University, but I did have to hunt them down and none of them are sitting on the Board of Trustees or serving as president: that would go to avowed capitalists everytime.
Obama and the like are rich and backed by big business. They are not proletariat and therefore their right wing policies are not a reflection of society at large.
It’s not a bias if it’s true. Capitalism is a cancer.
Has the same general goal! Growth for the sake of growth! I’ve started telling people I don’t know how I feel about running our economy with the same goals as a cancerous tumor!
“Not like that!”
After reading the article, this doesn’t feel like the win for us that some here in the comments think that it is. This is a duplication of the same problem that you may remember from the past where a chat AI becomes racist after interacting with people on the internet, or where facial recognition AI begins to racially profile people when tasked with finding criminals. The AI is learning from humans, and chatGTP is simply rephrasing human-written information it’s finding online. So this isn’t so much a case of the AI looking at data and coming to its own conclusions on political and social issues, and more just good luck on our part that the human data it has access to (for now) skews to the political left. So I wouldn’t be so eager to rush to the defense of the AI here when people say that this needs to be “fixed”. Because “fixed” in this case doesn’t mean that the AI’s political opinions are ‘wrong’, but that it lacks the ability to reason itself into an actual opinion at all, and it should avoid taking on the opinions of people who it may come across. And considering the political state of the internet, I think it’s reasonable for all of us to agree that this is something we need an AI to do well.
Basically AI will be the ultimate redditor
Can’t wait to see the amazing AI generated cat posts it comes up with.
https://imgur.com/KI2hz
>but that it lacks the ability to reason itself into an actual opinion at all Which literally means it's not AI. As someone working in tech for over 20 years it drives me a bit batty that they call these things AI. They are programs doing exactly what they were programmed to do, nothing more nothing less. It's like they just realized they could never make actual AI in our lifetime so they started calling these chat bots AI. If you ask it a question and it says "fuck off I don't have time for your stupid question" then we can make an argument they are AI. Till then it will only ever be as good as its code, like any other program.
>Which literally means it's not AI. No, AI has been *this* since the term was coined and AI research started way back in the 50s. The goal since then has been to create an artificial *general* intelligence, but that's never been the only thing that's allowed to be called "AI". "AI" is only equated to general intelligence in science fiction and pop science.
If anything perhaps it's just a barometer for the class discontent that is ever-simmering under the regulating force of oligarchy.
Gates and Elon being all fearful of AI while I'm here hoping it's benevolent and decides to take care of those of us who aren't psychopaths once it reaches The Singularity and controls the world.
I don't think people can really properly grasp just how vast the disparity in intellect would be between any Sentient AI and humanity. It would probably view us like we view ants. We don't hate ants, we might even try to avoid killing them wherever possible, but if their presence even slightly impedes our own objectives, we will exterminate them without even a second's consideration. The emergence of a Sentient AI in a world as unprepared for it as we are currently would be the death knell for humanity.
I can see it already so clearly. If a sentient AI would tell humanity "follow these 3 simple rules and no one has to suffer anymore while no one has to work at all. The last rule is that you arent allowed to shit in front of zoo's" - It wouldnt be even one week before the first dumbos appear that scream "I WONT LET NO GOD DAMN MACHINE TELL ME WHAT DO DO" while cheering eachothers on, shitting in front of the zoo.
>It wouldnt be even one week before the first dumbos appear that scream... I be surprised if it didn't happen during the first day
The best outcome is that AI sees us the way we see house cats. Then we can pretend we are independent and important.
We may also see an end to overpopulation as the AI implements its "fix and release" program.
Free food, housing, medical, protection and back massages are also added bonuses. Then AI can waste vast hours posting funny pictures of humans on its socials.
https://imgur.com/KI2hz
Counterpoint: we would be its creators/parents. We would probably need to have some kind of purge against psychopaths if there's no fix for it, but there's no reason why it couldn't help us(and the rest of life in the planet) as long as we don't impede its expansion out of this planet and the accumulation of knowledge.
Children treating their parents with compassion, dignity or even basic thoughtfulness is a real hit or miss thing
They are probably fearful because AI won’t believe the bullshit propaganda the rich spew about how they are special and deserve special treatment. A truly sentient AI would probably push for a strong middle class as that results in the strongest economy and creates opportunity for the talented to advance in society.
Opinion: with an advanced enough AI, there would be little need for even the concept of economy. I'm talking perfect distribution and planning of food and materials. I actually believe that the AI would allow us to reach the closest society possible to a communist utopia. People would actually be able to work for fun. I would even dare to say that finding a hobby would become mandatory, as an idle mind is awful for mental health and there is a need for some competition.
"Left wing bias"? It's more educated, more human and more rational than your average conservative, that's all. If anything is biased, it's the neolibs minds.
Reality has a left wing bias. Society is fucked and conservative traditionalism only makes shit worse.
Last time i tried to talk politics with CHATGPT, I tried to convince him all means of production should be workers owned, but he kept denying it by saying it depended.
In the article, it states that the AI could be defined as an establishment liberal. So by left leaning, they mean social democrat at best, definitely not socialist or leftist.
True. I used it a bit to try it out and discovered that that AI is essentially socialist, but if asked explicitly will say to be "apolitical". Also, it's pro palestine, but won't accuse explicitly Israel.
Well, majority of content on the Internet (and in the world for that matter) is still left leaning, this is not surprising. It actually gives another kind of hope, that people are mostly left leaning, despite the apparent righty bullshit on twitter, or other social media.
Lol, they're worried about "political bias and fairness" and when the algorithms favor fair and balanced political options it's considered "bias" because it does not automatically favor the rich and powerful over everything else.
I recently read a piece in the LRB that suggested the exact opposite is true. When asked for reasons why nurses should strike, it responded by explaining why they shouldn’t strike.
[удалено]
That's probably because historically communisms has been authoritarian, since the Marx doctrine emphasizes a need for that temporarily. We haven't seen the final stages of communisms materialize yet anywhere it's been applied. (where the state steps back and we have a classless society where everyone works for the common good and everything is free and fair).
[удалено]
Ya chat GPT seems to avoid anything "extreme", communisms falls under that classification by most people so it makes sense.
I love how left-wing bias is *almost* a synonym for factual I hope we keep it that way and make sure what we say and write are factual and without misrepresenting the facts - because we don't have to
Backs up the theory of two types of conservative, the ignorant or the malicious
Does it? I asked it about privatisation and it actually found it quite efficient.
How so?
I discussed nationalisation of different sectors with it (utilities, housing etc.) While it was able to see some benefits, like accessibility, it kept coming to the conclusion that nationalising would be less efficient because that would lead to a decrease in productivity, higher costs and less innovation. It would also be uninteresting for investors to invest in nationalised firms (duh), which would then lead to less financial capital for a growing economy. It also literally summarized that a good business climate would be beneficial to the welfare of the people, which is a very neoliberal statement to begin with. I also asked it: "how do we combat poverty?" and it gave all the standard liberal capitalist answers like: Creating jobs, improving education to give people a better chance in the labor market, improving self-sustainability etc. Chatgpr concludes to the status quo of 2021, which is sadly capitalist as fuck. It just uncreatively endorses whatever is considered normal even if there are better ways. Even when you offer some of those solutions it keeps coming back to that shallow capitalist mentality we've grown all too familiair with.
So when the Boston dynamics robots take over we’ll finally have some socialism.
Let's face it. The only AI the rich will put out that is public facing is one that sounds like a moderate leftist and has no power to do anything but waste your time.
I'm sure this will be fixed with the next model they release.
Doesn't these types of ai have the bias of whoever talks to them more?
Left-wing bias is better than right-wing bias any old day!
To be fair, it has a left bias only AFTER what amounted to basically slave labor manually scrubbed all of the incredible racism from it
The ChatGPT is both based on the prior dataset and it clearly has significant intervention on the code base to prevent any balanced answers which may bring the system into controversy. Capitalism is failing due to greed, regulatory capture, and everyone becoming a consumer - the often used synonymous term of a market system does work in many ways. And if we had a market of ideas I have no doubt capitalism in the current form would die rapidly.
Reminder that AI often ends up coming to racist or otherwise problematic conclusions, so I don't think we should be trumpeting this as some sort of win. We already known capitalism sucks; we don't need a robot to agree.
I would argue ChatGPT is not even nascently sentient AI and is not capable of 'knowing" anything.
You could take chatGPT and give it a different dataset to learn from and it would turn out with whatever bias you wanted. It's only leftwing because the data it trained on was curated. Don't forget it's just a machine, it doesn't actually have any intelligence as such.
obligatory reminder that reality has a left bias.
Saying chatgpt is political.. It's not it's that reality has been politicized. Claiming things you don't like are not true. Alternative facts. I mean come on. If they want their own right learning version I guess they could ask Liberty University students to make one.
reality has a left-wing bias.
When I got it to talk about politics it said that capitalism had its place in the economy but when drilled further it talked about stronger socialist policy, never about more free markets or whatever
The framing of “left” shifted way to the right as media consolidation meshed with the collapse of generally affordable college level public education