2026-10-02 08:45 UTC
@celesteh@hachyderm.io @reformed_content_marketer@mastodon.social
but isn't empowerment of the capital class and de-empowerment of the labour class inherent to any kind of mechanisation, unless the machine is extremely cheap to make?
Replies (1)
-
@celesteh@hachyderm.io 2026-10-02 09:30
@farseen@fedi.nptr.xyz @reformed_content_marketer@mastodon.social What you're describing with mechanisation is capitalism, not a feature of the machine. A machine like a loom gets more valuable output for less labour. LLMs cost much more to run than the value of their output. This is why I've described them as a financial scam. We could certainly imagine that a communist dictator might have dumped a ton of resource into one of these as a pet project, but it would be killed by his successor. If Stalin had gone in big for LLMs, the project would be protected as long as he was around to protect it and then it would have ended. However, whatever looms he bought were very unlikely to be scrapped.