this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2025
500 points (90.7% liked)

Flippanarchy

1006 readers
1018 users here now

Flippant Anarchism. A lighter take on social criticism with the aim of agitation.

Post humorous takes on capitalism and the states which prop it up. Memes, shitposting, screenshots of humorous good takes, discussions making fun of some reactionary online, it all works.

This community is anarchist-flavored. Reactionary takes won't be tolerated.

Don't take yourselves too seriously. Serious posts go to !anarchism@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Rules


  1. If you post images with text, endeavour to provide the alt-text

  2. If the image is a crosspost from an OP, Provide the source.

  3. Absolutely no right-wing jokes. This includes "Anarcho"-Capitalist concepts.

  4. Absolutely no redfash jokes. This includes anything that props up the capitalist ruling classes pretending to be communists.

  5. No bigotry whatsoever. See instance rules.

  6. This is an anarchist comm. You don't have to be an anarchist to post, but you should at least understand what anarchism actually is. We're not here to educate you.


Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] gsjdgrsg@sh.itjust.works 5 points 6 days ago

I think the vast majority of the anti-AI bullshit being spouted by the people in this comment section and the people in !fuck_ai@lemmy.world is just straight up trolling or copyright and capitalist friendly bootlicking.

The fact is that without capitalism the AI venture capitalist projects by tech bros wouldn't exist, but AI still would, open source, self-hostable, maybe even decentralized AI, but AI nonetheless. Also without capitalism copyright loses all it's meaning and desire and inevitably becomes problematic as a barrier hampering human creativity and knowledge. Asking for permission to make art is a courtesy, it shouldn't be required (especially for dead artists who can't give permission).

[–] kibiz0r@midwest.social 30 points 1 week ago (6 children)

So without capitalism, AI would not be obfuscating the sources of ideas, mischaracterizing the content of works, polluting communication channels with vapid slop, enticing emotionally-vulnerable people to self-destructive behavior, accelerating disinformation, enabling scams, profiling thought-crime, producing nonconsensual pornography…?

There’s no denying that capitalism is steering AI (and everything) in a dark direction, but AI is also just hazardous by its very nature. Moving beyond capitalism won’t automatically make humans more careful than we’ve ever been.

[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (19 children)

AI would not be obfuscating the sources of ideas

Who would care? Why would it be important?

mischaracterizing the content of works

Huh?

polluting communication channels with vapid slop

That can already be dealt with moderation tools. If you don't like GenAI slop, just ban the people doing it.

enticing emotionally-vulnerable people to self-destructive behavior,

If people do this (big "if" here), then the cause is again in Capitalism (alienation) giving an incentive to do so.

accelerating disinformation

Root cause: capitalism

enabling scams,

Capitalism

profiling thought-crime

Huh?

producing nonconsensual pornography…?

We were doing that since photoshop.

Just because you can spam a bunch of scary concepts, doesn't mean they stand up well

[–] Mortoc@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Another thing about AI slop is that it’s usually motivated by some sort of get rich quick thinking or plain old labor replacement. Both motivations disappear without capitalism.

[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Well, for myself, I just like generating pretty images for myself and my blogposts and to speed up my coding.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (18 replies)
[–] anarchiddy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

AI is also just hazardous by its very nature

I think the point is that there's nothing hazardous inherent in its nature, and pointing to the problematic uses under capitalism isn't any more a description of 'its nature' than is pointing to an ass a description of a chair's nature.

AI is a tool, just like any other, and the harm caused by that tool is largely defined by how it's used and by who.

There's no doubt that LLM's and other generative models are disruptive, but suggesting that they are inherently harmful assumes that the things and systems they are disrupting aren't themselves harmful.

Most of what you're pointing to as harm caused by AI is far more attributable to the systems it exists in (including and especially capitalism) and not the models themselves. The only issue that I can see with AI inherently is its energy demand - but if we're looking at energy consumption broadly then we'd be forced to look at the energy consumption of capitalism and consumerism under capitalism, too.

I imagine the sentiment here would be wildly different if we were scrutinizing the energy demand of gaming on a modern GPU.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] nature_man@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 1 week ago (2 children)

No actually. I have multiple concerns with "AI" that would continue to be concerns in a completely non-capitalism based system.

It would take several hours to type out some of them, but some that are very simple are: the resources required to have these "AI" systems are extensive and would be better used elsewhere, there are things that should not be copied (especially without consent of the creator) and used in a LLM or any image generator, and these systems only exist because of capitalism, without being able to extract and steal value from others, there is really no use for them

[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 1 week ago (3 children)

You can run inference on desktop gpus. Copyrights are a state enforced monopoly, not a law of nature. I don't recognise any control of culture by anyone, including the author. The technology can just as well exist outside of Capitalism

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] flicker@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

db0 woke up today and chose violence again.

I keep screaming it and all the fucking liberals come out of the woodwork to shit on AI- they can virtue signal all they want but I survived on selling my art for years and me and all the other artists I know can't say it loud enough:

If you aren't paying for art now then why the fuck are you mad about AI "stealing jobs"? And if you don't make art for a living I promise you, no one is mad at not having to draw somebody's Sonic OC or latex fetish to live! Uncouple the need to sell art to live and people don't stop making art, they make more of what they want to make!!

AI gives the power to make things to people who can't. It doesn't take away my ability at all. Stop the capitalist system that enslaves artists, and we will make more, and better!

[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 week ago

If you aren’t paying for art now then why the fuck are you mad about AI “stealing jobs”? And if you don’t make art for a living I promise you, no one is mad at not having to draw somebody’s Sonic OC or latex fetish to live! Uncouple the need to sell art to live and people don’t stop making art, they make more of what they want to make!!

I kinda wanna make a few spaces I help manage have a rule for April Fools day:

If you did not personally create the image, or pay for someone to create it from scratch, you are forbidden from sharing and viewing it. It is in violation of the copyright of the owner, and they did not give consent to the use of their Intellectual Property to be used and displayed in this manner. Copyright is automatically assumed to the creator, and unless consent was given to the exact person with demands, it is null and void unless stated.

99.99% of all media online weren't given consent to be shared or modified by the owners of the media. Everyone will say it's stupid for a company to try to expand its reach to the millions of faceless users. Yet will simp for them the moment they are briefly against AI. They will vouch for extensions to copyright, and say companies should purposefully creep their money and influence on the internet, because a bad AI model did something weird 5 years ago.

[–] Sasha@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Eh, I don't really buy it. You've still got an issue of plagiarism (notably not the same thing as copyright), soulless slop flooding creative spaces, the fact that LLMs just kinda lie all the time and then there's the abuse enabled by image models, icky stuff and it's absolutely not driven by capitalism.

Neural networks have a place in many fields, but when it comes to replacing human creativity, I'm not sold. I've certainly got no respect for anyone claiming to be an artist because they ran a program and stole the hardwork of potentially thousands of people. You can take away the profit motive, but you can't take out the social motives. People are dicks and capitalism isn't why they are, it's a symptom and a tool.

Maybe there's some use cases for that kind of thing, but I personally don't see it and think we'd be just fine leaving that sort of thing out of daily life. I don't see what we get beyond like making shitty graphics quickly or something, is that worth the harm?

[–] _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 week ago

You can’t steal art. Art is a manifestation of emotion, an idea immortalized. You don’t get to own ideas once they pass from your mind to another.

Every bit of art out there in the public is as much mine as anyone’s. Copyright and “intellectual property” are ridiculous concepts with no bearing whatsoever in reality. The very idea you could own part of another person’s intellect is absurd.

“Oh look, you just read this, that means I own the neurons you formed to remember it. Better not use my comment to craft a reply, that would be wrong of you.”

That’s how stupid you sound.

[–] Jomega@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago (2 children)

That's your solution for everything.

[–] DebatableRaccoon@lemmy.ca 18 points 1 week ago (3 children)

A good solution fixes multiple problems, young grasshopper.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (5 children)

I don't think people will stop spamming lazy AI art if capitalism goes away.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] MysticMushroom1776@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

The AI haters here are just flat out hypocrites, I mean why are you on this instance? Be honest, it was probably for !piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com, the largest community here (and one of the largest on Lemmy), maybe you didn't and in that case maybe you just don't understand the main mission of dbzer0 and the fact that copyright isn't something we care about, but for those who do it is hypocritical if not downright asinine to support and participate in piracy but also say that "It's important to respect intellectual property" when people discuss AI projects and training of AIs. I mean if you pirate movies or games you certainly aren't respecting copyrights yourself. Maybe you think it's different but those companies feel just as offended, and it's evident from their sleazy efforts to fight against piracy.

There are so many arguments that can be made against AI and might even apply in certain situations (Corporate monster AIs like OpenAI) but this one is just fucking stupid, and you all make yourselves sound like trolls when you come here whining about the importance of copyright and intellectual property.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›