Comment

Comment on

lena@gregtech.eu ⁨19⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

If we restructured society in a way that makes increases in efficiency benefit everyone I’d be fine with such things. The difference here is, however, that we don’t live in such a society and that LLMs aren’t actually useful or better at work that people are, it’s just that managers and CEOs think they are. They will realize this in a few years after most of their software is fucked over and they’ll have to hire actual developers to fix it.

source

Sort:hotnew top

snooggums@piefed.world ⁨19⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
The problem is we want increases in efficiency that benefit 99% of people but the 1% want the opposite and can override everyone else.

source
Juice@midwest.social ⁨18⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
Taylorist production has been tried, yielded objectively better results than the old production methods, and they were still scrapped. Workers wouldn’t adapt to more efficient production methods without more pay, and it necessitates worker-managers to train other workers. Since the owners of the factory refuse to pay workers more, so it’s DOA.

Capitalism isn’t rational, and can not become rational. “Increasing efficiency” means firing workers, not improving production. I know you maybe aren’t arguing for more efficient capitalism, just saying it has been tried. Taylorism is the Esperanto of production. “Increasing efficiency,” to the capitalists, means firing people, not making the system more rational.

source
- lena@gregtech.eu ⁨18⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
  It wasn’t my goal at all to advocate for capitalism, an inherently abusive system :P
  
  Increases in efficiency should lead to less work required and a better life for everyone
  
  source
  - Juice@midwest.social ⁨18⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
    I had a suspicion you weren’t advocating for capitalism. But just in case someone comes along and thinks “yeah make capitalism more efficient,” I like to underline the fact that “efficiency” has a different meaning if someone is a worker than if someone is a capitalist.
    
    source