• some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    If we all run out of money they will harvest the marrow from our bones. They’ll extract a fee, don’t doubt it.

  • deadlyduplicate@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Look up crisis theory, the rate of profit tends to fall in capitalist systems. Because each company is driven by competitive self-interest, it is incapable of acting for the good of the whole. You simply cannot devote resources to anything but trying to out-compete your rivals and in doing so the profit for everyone tends lower and lower until you have a crisis.

    • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Which is why you place hards limits on capitalism with a lotmof oversight like in the north European countries. It can be done right ifnits done right. That is, of you wa to do it right. If you simply want to say “fuck it, I want to get rich” then you go for the no limits no safe wors style that the US is practicing.

      • Valmond@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        My base rule is that if it’s needed or used by a majority of people, then the government should have it (probably exclusively too). Like hospitals, schools, infrastructure like roads and trains, electric grid, eventually the internet.

        Now, shops and food isn’t in there, probably because we shop wildly differentt I guess, but some base could be handled by rhe government (which is usually the case, like minimum rights to food etc).

  • randon31415@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    1024: This new farming technology means one person can feed 1000 people! What are the other 999 people supposed to do? Are the lords just going to conscript all us serfs and have us fight for their entertainment?

    • MissJinx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      The thing is, for AI to work we still need hardware, houses, food etc. Yes a lot of jobs will change but other new type of jobs will come.

      Remember at the end of the day AI can’t do CPR

    • jballs@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Q3 2026 will come around and the AI will report that revenues are down. The CEO will respond the only way they know, by ordering that costs be cut by laying off employees. The AI will report there is no one left to lay off but the CEO.

      Fade to black and credits roll.

  • BlackLaZoR@kbin.run
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    That’s economic ignorance - the more AI is used to produce goods, the cheaper they are - so you have to work less to fulfill your needs.

    • piyuv@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Hell yeah! People in 50s and even 20s worked 40 hours per week to feed a family of 4! Now we can do that by working much less than… wait, not even 2 working parents safely feed a family of 4? Even with all the gains in productivity?

    • soratoyuki@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Exactly this. That’s why groceries have dropped in price the last decade as cashiers are replaced by automated self checkouts. /s

  • Arn_Thor@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    That, my friend, is the problem for whichever schmuck is in charge after me, a C Suite executive. By then I will be long gone on my private island, having pulled the rip cord on my golden parachute.

  • Pasta Dental@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    The real answer is no one. They will quickly realize that at the root of the economy are the regular people, and since the economy is a cycle, when you cut off a part, the cycle doesn’t work anymore.

    People (doomers) here are saying businesses and rich people will, but this can only, work for a limited time, because either the products will shoot up in price since only the rich can afford them, or the businesses won’t be able to sell their products, so they can’t buy new things, which means no more revenue to the shareholders.

    Think of all the companies that live from b2b models, when you look closer, they are all at some the suppliers of b2c businesses, except, maybe military companies. That company that makes the lithography machines (asml) only sells to other businesses such as tsmc. Tsmc also only sells to other businesses, but they sell to businesses that sell to consumers.

    • The Stoned Hacker@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      i don’t think prices will shoot up, it’s just the wealthiest will have accumulated the absolute most amount of wealth they possibly could. Everything would crash but they would own everything. That’s of course if AI can fully replace us and produce everything that humanity needs practically forever but behind a paywall.

  • tonyn@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    When there is a scarcity of resources a population will shrink to sustainable levels. Right now there are too many people to share the scraps left from the billionaires hoovering up all the capital. People will stop having kids, others will die homeless, and population will decrease just as happens in any population of animals experiencing scarcity.

  • untorquer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Were already seeing a drop in product quality and reliability. Just try a search engine for practically anything. Chances are you already type “wiki” or “reddit” or “Lemmy” or whatever along with your search terms. AI(LLM) is just advanced cargo cult development. It won’t translate to physical design even though that’s being pushed by management level and marketing. Products will stop being useful altogether.

    That’s on top of the tailoring to business and wealthy class as others have argued here. But even that will have to endure enshitification. Ultimately the wealthy will pay for labor on their toys(they already do, we just can’t afford those).

    This us a marketing and executive delusion issue.

  • Hello_there@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    If all the money is hoarded by the rich, who is going to spend money to make the economy run?

  • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Well, in the purely fictional hypothetical that an LLM could advance to the point of reliably replacing humans without a stark loss of quality and marginal cost-benefit before legislations step in to make the cost of increased power consumption and environmental damage reflect on what these companies pay in:

    Their will be an owners class who have stake or claim over facilities and technology to utilize the AI, and then there will be an everybody else who have to fight tooth and nail politically for basic human rights as well as shelter and food. Just the current system but whether it’s that much worse or better depends on how well our democracies function.

    • mechoman444@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      An llm will never be able to do this. Unfortunately the word AI has been hijacked by companies and marketeers. Ai now means just about anything really.

      They’re actually coming up with new words to describe what AI used to mean such as AGI, which stands for artificial general intelligence.

      To elaborate on the premise of this post, The boost that we’re going to get from an actual artificial intelligence one that is perhaps sentient will be so much that the tasks that were once performed Will become so mundane and menial that it will not make any difference who performs those tasks or if they’re even being paid to do so.

      In the same sense that the printing press removed the necessity for scribes, at least for the majority. Or the firearm displaced the bow and arrow as the dominant weapon.

      Eventually, what general artificial intelligence will give us is a world free of our Faith-Based monetary system currently dominating the world.

      In essence, we shouldn’t need money after general artificial intelligence is implemented.

      • sparkle@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        Cymraeg
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        The term AGI has been used since more than 2 decades ago, and AI never specifically implied something with human intelligence (maybe in the 40s-50s when it was just being invented, but not after that). “AI” has always refered to things like Siri and the YouTube algorithm and pathfinding AIs and trackers for anti-air systems and whatever else.

        I remember that before I started programming I’d get annoyed at machinery like 3d printers for the “stupid AI” not working. Then I’d probably bang it or something to try to get it to work lol

  • someguy3@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Capitalism doesn’t look that far ahead.

    I agree it’s going to be problem. It’s already happened when we exported manufacturing jobs to China. Most of what was left was retail which didn’t pay as much but we struggled along (in part because of cheap products from China). I think that’s why trinkets are cheap but the core of living (housing and now food) is relatively more expensive. So the older people see all the trinkets (things that used to be expensive but are now cheap) and don’t understand how life is more expensive.