Google’s AI-driven Search Generative Experience have been generating results that are downright weird and evil, ie slavery’s positives.

  • 1984@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Slavery was great for the slave owners, so what’s controversial about that?

    And yes, of course it’s economically awesome if people work without getting much money for it, again a huge plus for the bottom line of the companies.

    Capitalism is evil against people, not the AI…

    Hitler was also an effective leader, nobody can argue against that. How else could he conquer most of Europe? Effective is something that evil people can be also.

    That women in the article being shocked by this simply expected the AI to remove Hitler from all included leaders because he was evil. She is surprised that an evil person is included in effective leaders and she wanted to be shielded from that and wasn’t.

    • mimichuu_@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Hitler’s administration was a bunch of drug addicts, the economy 5 slave owner megacorps beaten by all other industrialized nations. They weren’t even all that well mobilized before the total war speech. Then he killed himself in embarrassment. How is any of that “effective”?

    • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Oh look another caricature of capitalism on social media… and you tied Hitler into it…

      Central characteristics of capitalism include capital accumulation, competitive markets, price systems, private property, property rights recognition, voluntary exchange, and wage labor.

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism

      “Capitalism” is not pro slavery, shitty people that can’t recognize a human is a human are pro slavery… Because of course if you can have work done without paying somebody for it or doing it yourself, well that’s just really convenient for you. It’s why we all like robots. That has nothing to do with your economic philosophy.

      And arguing that Hitler was an “effective leader” because he conquered (and then lost) some countries while ignoring all the damage he did to his county and how it ultimately turned out… Honestly infuriating.

      • WaterChi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s amazing how low a wage you will voluntarily accept when the alternative is homelessness and starving to death.

        • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          (I just deleted my comment, let me try again).

          I find it frustrating that you associate that with capitalism and presumably “not that” with socialism. These terms are so broad you can’t possibly say that outcome will or won’t ever happen with either system.

          Blaming capitalism for all the world’s woes is a major oversimplification.

          If you look at the theory side of both… Capitalist would tell you a highly competitive free market should provide ample opportunities for better employment and wages. Socialist would tell you that such a thing would never happen because society wouldn’t do that to itself.

          In practice, the real world is messier than that and the existing examples are the US (capitalist), the Soviet Union (socialist), and mixed models (Scandinavian). Granted, they’re all “mixed”, no country is “purely” one or the other to my knowledge.

          • WaterChi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Those terms aren’t broad. People abusing then doesn’t change meaning

      • GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Seems like people think everything America does is capitalism. The same thing happened with communism and socialism. The words have very little meaning now.

    • Bondrewd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      Actually, slavery in its original form is also a net positive. You just murdered half a tribe. You cant let the other half just live. Neither do you want to murder them. Thus you will enslave them.

      • samus12345@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        So you create a problem by murdering half a tribe, then offer a solution. That’s not a net positive.

        • Bondrewd@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You might be lacking basic understanding of tribal politics and economics then. In a tribal setting you have to neutralise the other tribe, as you do not have a standing army. Any conflict you get into, you are “conscripting” your entire male population.

          In every kind of tribal conflict ever, regardless of having the moral upperhand, it was a bogstandard way of conduct. You dont have men to be stationed in enemy territory, that is the manpower that is NEEDED in the fields the second its time to sow or reap, so you dont fucking starve.

          So any conflict comes around, you need to make sure that once its over, you will be left the f alone. You have to really hit it home. Maybe thats not obvious, but the clans in this context are probably not NATO or even UN members. :)