southerntofu

Came here to say this. It takes political will, but money is certainly not the issue. It's just like with healthcare, free healthcare for all costs much less per person than privatized healthcare like they have in the USA. It's just a matter of designing the system properly so the money doesn't get siphoned off by parasite investors.

Oh, thank you for clarifying! That is entirely believable, and i'm also one of these people then. I just didn't understand what you meant. I thought you meant people hated AI for being creepy alien tech from scifi movies, not for being unreliable, untrustworthy, etc...

Sorry again for the misunderstanding.

Sorry for misinterpreting your original comment.

I'm not really convinced there's people who don't like AI "because of what it is". I mean, because of what it is, beyond any social/political considerations.

The only case i know of that is when there was an open letter with Sam Altman and other AI investors calling out the existential danger of AI, which in my view was a way to divert the debate from political questions to hypothetical Matrix/Terminator questions about consciousness and singularity.

You are being overly dismissive of a mindset you obviously don't understand. Of course being anti-AI is about decent living conditions for humans. Most of us don't believe in singularity or Matrix-style threats.

But current AI is actively destroying our breathable/livable planet by drawing unmatched quantities of resources (see also DRAM shortage, etc), all the while exploiting millions of non-union workers across the world (for classification/transcription/review), and all this for two goals:

1) try to replace human labor: problem is we know any extracted value (if at all) will benefit the bourgeoisie and will never be redistributed to the masses, because that's exactly what happened with the previous industrial revolutions (Asimov-style socialism is not exactly around the corner)

2) try to surveil everyone with cameras and microphones everywhere, and build armed (semi-)autonomous robots to guard our bourgeois masters and their data centers

There is nothing in this entire project that can be interpreted to benefit the workers. People opposing AI are just lucid about who that's benefiting, and in that sense the luddite comparison is very appropriate.

I don't think it was less, though only future historians will come up with actual numbers. It was less public, though.

Most of the world never tolerated it. Even when western governments tolerated it, the population did not; see also the huge worldwide demonstrations against the Iraq war.

I think the difference in perception is because the european oligarchy is now being effectively treated as was previously the rest of the world, so they're now taking a stance because they feel threatened, whereas they previously saw themselves as aligned with the US government no matter what.

I didn't hear about this french legislator, but that's funny given the level of rampant corruption in french government. Nothing new (see also Pasqua, Foccart, etc), but in the past decades the information was not widely available so it was at least possible to pretend not to know.

Much of the government including Macron himself are involved in corruption scandals. Others are involved in rape scandals. Others in fiscal fraud. But you're correct they're not as open about it as Trump is.

Assuming you're from the USA, your two main parties are exactly like that. The appearances have changed, but Obama drone-assassinating random children on the other side of the world was not much better than what Trump is doing.

Not defending Trump, to be clear, just saying US imperialism and fascism has much deeper roots and that removing Trump is not going to fix any issues the rest of the world has with the USA.

> Does this also mean only using "standard" parts? Or does the manufacturer have to over-produce the parts for, lets say 7 years

Why not? I don't understand how it's legal for manufacturers to produce absolute trash that can't be replaced and will just end up in a landfill. I think 7 years is far from enough, but because computers evolve quickly maybe 15 years is ok. For the rest of electro-mechanical goods, 50 years should be the baseline.

If a car or fridge from 50 years ago is still working with proper maintenance, that should be the minimum to be expected from products released today.

Most of humanity has lived without police for most of its existence. It's not an inherent part of life. And in many places, the police is a very recent (few centuries old) invention with ties to oppressive structures such as slavery and colonialism.

Whether abolishing the police, or defunding the police (to deescalate the militarization), both are proposals formulated by serious academics and politicians, whether you agree or not. It's not virtue signalling. If anything, "defund the police" is still very badly regarded outside very small circles and there's no credit to be gained by holding such positions.

Correct! My whole point was that whether that's a flip or a flop also depends on the legal environment and whether the law is actually enforced. Which is also applicable to AI and its massive copyright/copyleft violations at scale (whether or not that's legitimate or useful is yet another interesting question).