Why Hamilton councillors voted down a pause on datacentres

All I am saying is that, baked into the design and function of these material GenAI systems, is a model of human thought and creativity that justifies subjugation and exploitation.

Ali Alkhatib wrote a really nice (short) essay that, while it’s not saying exactly what I’m saying, outlines ways to approach a definition of AI that allows the kind of critique that I think both of us can appreciate: https://ali-alkhatib.com/blog/defining-ai

Matter being the primary mover does not mean that ideas and ideals don’t have consequences. What is the reason we want the redistribution of material wealth? To simply make evenly sized piles of things? No, it’s because we understand something about the human experience and human dignity. Why would Marx write down his thoughts, if not to try to change the world?

These systems are premised on the idea that human thought and creativity are matters of calculation. This is a deeply anti-human notion.

https://aeon.co/essays/can-computers-think-no-they-cant-actually-do-anything

The Luddites weren’t simply “attacking machinery” though, they were attacking the specific machinery owned by specific people exploiting them and changing those production relations.

And due to the scale of these projects and the amount of existing work they require in their construction, there are no non-exploitative GenAI systems