Michael @ M1ch431 @slrpnk.net Posts 0Comments 95Joined 4 mo. ago
I hear you. I just wonder, will it be worth it in the end to for them to see to it that society rots and capitalism "wins", by shutting down discourse in the limited places that it is able to exist?
I'd reason that it won't be worth it. I just wish they could see it that way too.
That nuance is not important - it's not worth wasting your breath on. If people focused on root causes of the dysfunction and the change needed to solve the issues plaguing our societies - we'd be much better off.
The nuance isn't lost to me, I just don't care to quantify it and then shout it to the heavens. It makes no difference to me whether Elon Musk is worse than Bill Gates. They can duke that battle out themselves if they care to.
I'll reiterate the point from my other comment. Value judgements are a waste of time, energy, and our voices.
Whether or not Bill Gates is worse than Elon Musk is just as important as to whether Tom Cruise is a better actor than Leonardo DiCaprio. Neither value judgement is worth my breath. It's a pointless exercise.
We are reaching a critical junction in our timeline where these billionaires can not and should not exist any longer. We've learned our lessons, their benefit and merit is irrelevant because even the best billionaires sit silently and are complicit. They have power, influence, and wealth - all the ingredients needed to directly affect change.
At best, they throw around pennies that don't address root causes and play the PR game, or play the blame game by focusing on individuals who are absolutely not responsible for the root causes of various issues that plague our societies.
If engineers/developers directly involved with Microsoft have called out Microsoft, and they were quickly silenced and fired, I'm more inclined to believe them versus a supposed lack of evidence.
Older reporting: https://www.972mag.com/microsoft-azure-openai-israeli-army-cloud/
According to the documents, the AI services that the Defense Ministry purchased from Microsoft include translation (about half of the average monthly consumption during the first year of the war), OpenAI’s GPT-4 model (about a quarter of the consumption), a speech-to-text conversion tool, and an automatic document analysis tool. In October 2023, the army’s monthly consumption of AI services provided by Azure jumped sevenfold compared to the month preceding the war; by March 2024, it was 64 times higher.
AI is a commodity that's being developed by the few. They are shaping it to do things that are not for human benefit, like war and surveillance. It's the truth. They are responsible for their choices and actions, they are consciously making this technology.
If you read the bottom part of my response, you'd hear that I'm just calling out the bullshit you're peddling. You don't really care, you're focused on purity testing impassioned individuals who feel strongly about these subjects.
Microsoft is making the decision to directly sell their AI to that state and its military. It doesn't change the fact that every being on earth shares responsibility as well. But I don't have a direct ability to stop Microsoft from choosing to sell their proprietary technologies to support a country in surveilling, targeting, and killing innocents.
I will do everything in my power to voice my opinion and convince others that AI shouldn't be used for war. I don't want to live in that world and I'm sure many others don't as well.
As for Linus, his stances about the use of his technology in war is pretty clear. He doesn't like it, but he can't stop it. His software is open-source. There's a big difference between open-source software you give to all for free (for the benefit of all of humanity) and proprietary software that you provide only with payment.
I think making value judgements on individuals is a counterproductive use of our time, energy, and voice. That's what I'm trying to point out.
If we focused on root causes and the change we'd like to see to solve those problems, we'd be smooth sailing as a world already.
What information we do have is regularly downplayed and whitewashed by media, if it's addressed at all. Dissent and critical voices are muted. We are distracted regularly in every direction.
We can leverage our collective power by striking and taking to the streets before the collapse hits the fan.
We need a new system, human rights for all, and direct democracy.
News should not be able to openly air propaganda without providing factual evidence and counter-arguments. There needs to be oversight for news organizations that repeatedly distort the truth, manipulate the evidence, or suppress viewpoints that differ from their own. If they cannot comply with fair and balanced reporting, they can't air their propaganda anymore and call it news.
We need to take Lemmy's and the larger fediverse's concept and example and make decentralized media a reality for the masses. I wish I were able to spearhead this myself, but I would gladly support this effort in any way I could if an idea or plan manifested.
Can I get a copy of Microsoft's AI on the free market? Can I get direct support for killing children and women with a company's proprietary AI on the free market?
Your arguments have fallen flat, but I'm here to be enlightened. You know so much that you're defending these companies and diluting their involvement, so clearly I must be misunderstanding something here or my knowledge isn't sufficient.
Convince me harder that Microsoft's direct involvement is actually not so bad, and these dastardly companies that indirectly provide hardware are somehow just as responsible for AI killing innocents. If these hardware manufacturers have specific contracts or involvement with that state or its military, I'd like to know.
Microsoft Office also doesn't especially facilitate the killing of innocents. And they could easily use another software, the functionality isn't unique or specialized like AI.
Just to be clear, the whole world is indeed responsible for what happens here. The free market doesn't absolve everyone of their shared responsibility. You could pull your entire head of hair out boycotting or screaming at every individual or group that provides support to one thing or the other, direct or otherwise.
My goal is to just point out the truth and also help people see it clearly. Microsoft et. al are a symptom of a larger dysfunction in society. People are so disconnected and propagandized that they don't even know truth from fiction, and the people that do understand the truth (to some degree) sit there and downplay modern atrocities as "the best we can do" and point fingers wildly at individuals who the media wants us to pay attention to instead of addressing the root causes.
AI should not be used for military purposes. That's my point.
And I'd like to apologize in advance if I misunderstood or misrepresented your points.
I'm not suggesting that they be murdered. You're saying some are worse than others, I'm just saying the concept should die.
Thanks for agreeing with my sentiment loosely, sorry to trigger you.
You said you boycott all of them. How are you posting a reply?
I am not the same commenter.
Providing goods on the free market is not the same thing as directly partnering. Please enlighten me, does Intel, AMD, and ARM specifically and directly sell/provide their specialized components through another mechanism than the free market to that state/military?
What hardware or software Microsoft chooses to power their infrastructure is their choice. Could the companies that provide this hardware boycott Microsoft? I don't know how effective that would be because you can't choose who buys your products on the free market - you, however, can choose who you directly sell to or contract with.
And I don't care how smart AI and specifically LLMs are. The hardware is irrelevant. AI is still determining the targets (and potentially even firing the shots). This technology and the companies who provide this specialized technology are, at minimum, participating in the slaughter. The AI is proprietary and closed-source, these companies are willingly providing access and working with their military to specialize it for war.
He's acting like Elon Musk is solely responsible. He's diluting a very large issue (modern slavery) and watering it down to Elon Musk bad.
Bill Gates is educated and present in these countries. He knows what really is going on.
Can you blame me for being angry that there is mass suffering, death, and slavery, while everybody in the know acts dumb, and the truth is hidden from the masses?
Edit: Your downvotes have been noted. Thanks for providing your feedback finitebanjo.
I'm mad that he's silent and complicit while people suffer. Perhaps I'll work on my anger while he hopefully works on finding his voice and speaking the truth.
He pays regularly for media attention, why can't he pay to expose western atrocities?
If there is still slavery and these countries are largely poor, yet western society relies on them for their labor, natural resources, and goods/exports, his 100 billion dollars means nothing.
He could've spent that 100 billion a whole lot more effectively. Like shining a light on western companies supporting child slavery to harvest cocoa or enabling these countries to break free from western imperialism.
That's all I see Bill doing. Throwing coins at impoverished and exploited people does not properly address or solve the issues they are facing. Bill Gates surely knows of the exploitation that African countries face at the hands of western imperialism. He could use his influence to shine a light on modern atrocities.
If they were paid fairly for their labor and paid a fair price for their goods and exports; these countries would not be starving, they could afford their own vaccination programs on the back of the own economies, they would be able to provide everyone with access to clean water, and they would be able to develop their societies as they see fit, including providing education to their citizens.
Because $92 million is such a large number when you have so much wealth. What would that fund here? A handful of buildings and a few highways?
Directly partnering with and providing services/technology/AI to a state's military, that is in the act of war, is facilitating that war.
Using AI to target strikes/etc., is absolutely AI making the decision to kill. They just chose to let AI do it for them.
How much money has Bill put towards developing Africa and directly improving their living standards?
Has he addressed modern slavery and modern child slavery (which we rely on for our cocoa)?
Has he addressed colonialism and imperialism?
These countries are extracted for everything they are worth, they are exploited for their labor, resources, and goods, and they remain poor while wealth concentrates to the few in first-world countries.
His "philanthropy" surely helps him to be aware of the situations that these countries face. But let's just shift an important topic and reduce it to value judgements. Got it.
I'm personally saying that no person should be able to accumulate wealth, power, and influence to such a degree and also use his wealth to pay people to sing his praises and like him.
I'm not making value judgements on these two individuals. I'm simply stating that there is no merit to billionaires existing.
My point is that the government doesn't exist, it's a facade that veils the reality. Just seems like we are desynced here, which is fine.
Bill Gates could be spending his money to develop Africa. He could've already put money towards solving the water crisis.
He could be the addressing colonialism, imperialism, and modern slavery - including calling out our companies that knowingly use and support child slavery (e.g. for our cocoa). It is a raw deal for these countries - and the first-world overwhelmingly benefits from their labor, resources, and goods/exports.