Thinking specifically about AI here: if a process does not give a consistent or predictable output (and cannot reliably replace work done by humans) then can it really be considered “automation”?

          • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 天前

            The product exists as a use-value. How it is created does not matter for the user of the use-value unless the process was the use, ie art. Labor is all that matters from the worker’s perspective, they get none of what they create unless they are paid in kind. What you appear to be arguing is that labor involving AI is an almost supernatural corrupting force, like a calculator.

            • patatas@sh.itjust.worksOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 天前

              Ah to be fair i did misinterpret your previous statement.

              But no, I am arguing that we are not able to ignore knowledge of the production process. Nothing mystical about that.

              • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                2 天前

                What does “ignoring knowledge of the production process” even mean? Who is doing the ignoring? What knowledge are we talking about? You’ve said before that using AI is instrinsically damaging, but have only shown proof that AI can be misused if we don’t understand its limitations, a sentiment the article you linked echos exactly but you appear to disagree with.

                • patatas@sh.itjust.worksOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 天前

                  sigh

                  You said it doesn’t matter if we can tell how something was made.

                  This conversation is over. Thanks

                  • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    2 天前

                    I said from the consumer’s point of view, it doesn’t matter unless the process is the commodity, ie art. I said that if the process isn’t the commodity, then from the consumer’s perspective, they are roughly equivalent if both are identical end-products.

                    From the laborer’s point of view, throwing a few prompts into an LLM is hardly an expression of artistry, art has use-value when the medium is intimately grappled with as a form of expression, whatever form that may be. If the laborer is just trying to show a floor plan, for example, they don’t need to draw it by hand, the information is the goal. AI is fine if advanced enough to help with that.

                    That’s why it’s important to correctly analyze tools, their limitations, and where they could have potential use, rather than insisting on avoiding tool usage for not making us “struggle” as hard.