Pika Labs new generative AI video tool unveiled — and it looks like a big deal::The new Pika 1.0 tool comes after a $55 million funding round for the generative AI company and is a big step up in AI video production.

  • archomrade [he/him]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Theft of work value from the working class has existed since kings and queens have married their cousins.

    Anger at AI for theft is just plainly misdirected. I count your condemnation of theft sufficiently signaled, though.

      • archomrade [he/him]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I completely get the confusion, I don’t hold it against you. I never denied that AI models involved theft, i asserted that the problem with AI isn’t about theft.

        A luddite in today’s terminology is someone who opposes new technologies, but The Luddites weren’t opposed to the mechanization of their labor per say, they took issue with the commodification of their labor and the private ownership of the machines that aided and sometimes supplanted it. They didn’t go destroying the textile mills because of some principled stance against progress, they were going to war against the capital owners who suppressed them and forced them to compete against the machines that were made by their own hands.

        The Luddites (rightly) identified the issue with the ownership of the machines, not the machines themselves. You only have half the picture; yes, they’ve stolen from you (not just your data, but your labor) - but they’ve also withheld from you the value of that product. It’s not the existence of AI that created that relationship, it’s capital.

          • archomrade [he/him]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Again, no worries for any misgivings or misunderstandings.

            True, AI can’t produce art (at least, we can agree that there will always be some absent quality from the product of a generative model that makes human art art), but it can produce many other things of value that does supplant a real person’s product. Likewise, there are qualities of art that make it a commodity that can be sold - to pay the bills - that lessen and sometimes corrupts art. Some may even argue that Art can only be something that is done for the sake of itself and for no other purpose; it is good-in-itself. And funnily enough, craftsmen have been saying for literal centuries that machines can’t reproduce that particular quality innate in hand-made crafts.

            You also fail to mention the Luddites engaged with reality too, and didn’t just talk about ideology all day, like the average Twitter communist is wont to do.

            I do remember mentioning, and possibly even advocating, for the Luddite course of action though. You’re right, we shouldn’t only sit around and talk shit about theft, we should also be doing the thieving ourselves and raiding the textile mills.

            On theft; would I condemn theft if I didn’t recognize private ownership to begin with? You’re twisting yourself in knots; I can’t help but think it’s because you’re trying so hard to ‘getch’ me.

              • archomrade [he/him]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                I realize you’re not engaging leftist theory seriously here, but if you were I would recommend this paper on the topic of digital new media as viewed through a Marxist and political economy framework.

                Regardless, I don’t see the exploitation of user activity as a theft of ‘personal property’(nor would marx), it is closer to the private ownership of common resources (i.e. private ownership of land and the resources on it, land being the platform where free human activity occurs, and the raw resource as the data being collected). A leftist might assert user activity and communication as a communally shared resource, not one privately exploited, and the resulting tools that utilize that common resource as one that is collectively shared, not privately owned.

                Once again, it’s not about theft

                  • archomrade [he/him]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    telemetry? The People’s Telemetry?

                    Ah, now this WOULD constitute theft (or at least a severe invasion of privacy), since by all accounts a personal device is expected to be personal property, no?

                    I was of course referring to public communication shared on public social media (the kind used for model training, in case you’ve forgotten), not to the private activities one conducts in ones own house (as an example).

                    For one accusing me of reductionism, you seem quite good at it yourself.

                    Do let me know when you’ve had a chance to read that paper.