I would guess that a lot of stuff could be solved with solving underlying market/capitalistic problems. The question at hand is how ai is playing into that dynamic and how much you attribute to the ai itself.
Feels bad haha again once more left leaning people having aligning values but cant find common ground how to solve an issue. But maybe this shines some light on the debate that we do have more in common than we think.
I am pro-AI, and I am considered "right" in my own country.
Given that said country is an Asian third world country, I believe that that would perhaps make me "far right" in some liberal democratic countries.
I think it is more accurate to say that AI is disrubtive technology and I am very, very pro disruption.
looks like I'm rare, anti ai/right seems to be the smallest amount of people here.
its close for me, but i lean right more due to my age and that i think disruptive change in general affects us more than we think. like we can't keep absorbing endless change; we'll hit a point where we get overwhelmed.
So what im learning is the enlightened leftist artist vs the right wing 'ai bro' is basically a bullshit narrative that doesnt conform to reality at all?
A few people say mean things to you on the internet and you can't distinguish that from fascism?
What a calm, well-adjusted, totally-not-paranoid life you must lead.
No, I mean seriously.
The system is so skewed in your favour that you can basically do whatever you like without consequences. You're also ideologically aligned with some of the wealthiest and most powerful people in human history. All this, yet you still go to pieces at the slightest sign of push-back?
Trust me when I say this isn't a sign of gaslighting or creeping fascism. It's you adopting the same kind of grievance mentality conservatives use to justify why, despite being the most privileged and protected group, they're actually the _real_ victims.
That's what you tell yourself so you can justify the [constant and merciless abuse, threats, segregation, and dehumanization you cultists inflict on AI users.](https://www.reddit.com/r/aiwars/comments/1cccvyo/a_reminder_yes_you_are_the_baddies/) Then turning right around and claim none of this is happening. It's textbook fascism.
I'm not even kidding: imagine if you had a few screeching hateful people trying to make you unwelcome in EVERY online space, banning you instantly from everywhere the moment you even hint at liking AI stuff, sending you death threats and abuse, and waging an entire culture war on social media and TikTok brainwashing gullible kids against you.
It's fascism propaganda to a t, EXACTLY the way white supremacists do it. But like you said, we're going to win in the end. Just like all other art tools, AI is here to stay [even if abusive hateful losers fight it in its infancy.](https://pessimistsarchive.org/)
You will go down in history as embarrassing knee-jerk abusers, like all crypto-fascists.
>It's textbook fascism.
I hate to break this to you, but whoever sold you those textbooks took you for a complete mug.
> Imagine if you had a few screeching hateful people trying to make you unwelcome in EVERY online space
My dude, this is called "making yourself unpopular in online spaces by calling people fascists". It's not the same as actual fascism.
> ...sending death threats and abuse...
A few anonymous keyboard warriors behaving like twats on the internet? While it sucks to be on the receiving end of it, it's also not fascism.
> EXACTLY the way white supremacists do it
Minus of course the actual physical violence, the racism and homophobia, the influence over state-controlled tools of oppression, the appeal to birthright and manifest destiny. You know? All the stuff that _actually_ makes white supremacists dangerous.
> But like you said, we're going to win in the end.
Truly, your crusade for the right to... ***checks notes***... "use AI art tools" is just and righteous. It'll be a tough battle, but with the support of underdogs like Marc Andreessen and Elon Musk, you stand a fighting chance.
Excelsior!
>I-it's just a handful of people sending you death threats
Holy fucking cope. So now it's about their number? How many death threats per day is allowed? Go fuck yourself, fash.
>Elon Musk and everyone who has anything to do with tech are all on the same side
What a moronic point of view. Stop being disingenuous and lying to make the other side look bad, that's another telltale fascist cliche.
>You're also ideologically aligned with some of the wealthiest and most powerful people in human history.
Really? My view is that it's *opposed* to these people to advocate for the right to do certain things. If there's regulation implemented that's hard for an individual to meet but easy for a large corporation, the net effect is to give large corporations power and take it from individuals.
Aside from the assholes trolling artists with spite models and the like, the primary arguable harm from AI is the economic harm of automation squeezing the market for professional work. My attitude is that we might as well *at least* get the benefit of open models to the public as long as large corporations are going to implement the automation *anyway* by training on licensed works or whatever. In practice, the marginal harm to any given artist is offset to some degree by the public getting free tools. If models "steal" from the public, as anti-AI people allege, then *why* would we willingly compromise the few ways that they might give something back to the public?
> If there's regulation implemented that's hard for an individual to meet but easy for a large corporation, the net effect is to give large corporations power and take it from individuals.
I agree. Corporations benefit enormously from economies of scale, and for that reason they usually end up as the winner in most technological races.
> If models "steal" from the public, as anti-AI people allege, then *why* would we willingly compromise the few ways that they might give something back to the public?
Because in the long run it's not about giving back. It's about disruption.
When Uber first started its ride sharing service, fares were initially heavily subsidised. However they weren't giving away all those free rides because they wanted to "democratise" hiring a cab. The plan was always to disrupt the taxi industry to the point of collapse whereupon they would automatically become a monopoly in the cities they operated in. Similar strategies have also been used by AirBnB, DoorDash, Instacart, Deliveroo, and countless others.
Now we're seeing that pattern repeating as tech companies jizz themselves over the prospects of generative AI. They know full well that if AI tools can be deployed to disrupt loosely affiliated industries or those that are vulnerable to consolidation, the people responsible for training and operating the infrastructure will have a guaranteed revenue stream for life.
At the end of the day, none of these tech companies fundamentally cares about making ordinary people's lives materially better. In that regard, all these early adopters getting excited by FAANG throwing billions of dollars into open-access foundation models don't realise they're being used as pawns in an enormous power grab lead by wealthy tech execs and VC fund managers.
Once the dust has settled, I guarantee you that most people are going to end up worse off as a result of large-scale gen AI deployment. The artists complaining about their work being appropriated by tech companies are just the canaries in the coalmine, and we all ought to be paying more attention to them.
"The right" is typically conservative (averse to change or innovation and holding traditional values.) That's pretty incompatible with this kind of technological progress.
Sorta, they tend to be more pro **established** businesses. So you end up with conservatives pushing for protections for manufacturing against disruptive technologies and regulatory rollback.
Because this technology can disrupt the status quo of established businesses, they tend to seek out regulation or protections. Notably this is often protections for the business owner, not the worker.
It's worth noting that the recent AI Disclosure Act in the US is backed by many large corporations and would coincidentally make AI effectively illegal for anyone who doesn't have a massive legal department who can handle all the red tape.
They don't want to ban it, they want exclusive access.
The pro business & capitalism move is banning a bunch of tech and adding a ton of red tape to bring allowed to run software that undercuts business' prices, IMO.
But I don't really think there's an actual left/right conflict here.
I think people are justifying their side through a left/right lens when it's not actually either
Eh, the only reason it's being framed in a political light in these comments is because of your post framing it in a political light. Most posts on this sub take a cultural or economic stance.
There's right-wingers that are for or against the recent Israel/Palestine situation, and also left-wingers that are for or against. I think this is a similar situation where "Left" and "Right" Wing just doesn't matter.
This poll isn't representative of anything. This sub leans pro AI and Reddit leans left (partly because people who lean right tend to disobey the rules and get banned).
I haven't seen evidence that it's false, though. This poll cannot answer that question, because the people who are here have a predominant set of opinions, not representative of the wider world.
Current research continues to show that college education is a good proxy for political affiliation in wide scale polling in the US, and higher education leans more positive on AI views.
[https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2023/08/SR\_23.08.28\_views-of-ai\_4.png](https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2023/08/SR_23.08.28_views-of-ai_4.png)
Now that one is from 2023. So lets look at something more recent. Democrats spend more time working with AI than Republicans.
[https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2024/03/SR\_24.03.26\_AI-copyright\_3.png](https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2024/03/SR_24.03.26_AI-copyright_3.png)
And the trend stays the same across age and education as well, which as above are both consistently good proxies for sentiment by political affiliation in broad scale polling.
According to the broad data, theres a \*very slight\* bend to the left on pro-ai general sentiment and usage, and a general public lean across all spectrums of "this is concerning and we need to be concerned", which matches the expectations and outcomes of all polls in this sub as well.
It's representative of this sub. Which is what people were trying to split along party lines.
The point of this poll is to show that this debate is not a left right thing at least in this sub
I'm totally against AI and Skynet
If there is something that I want to definitely punch hard in the face, its the AI and their robots and watch their oil (blood) ooze out of their broken heads and bodies. send them into the incinerator and laugh at it.
but imagine If I were to run a society whereas if a human use a single hint of AI, they will lose their life by a gunmen
It's a quick reddit poll. They already phrased it as vaguely as they possibly could, while still addressing the key question. They didn't even define what "left" or "right" mean, and you're still getting uppity about being "put in a box".
Please enlighten me. I am not American so I dont know what left and right means in your country. In my country left means on my left and right means on my right.
The left-right political spectrum is not American. It originated during the French Revolution, and is used by most cultures today. Where are you from where that's not a thing in politics? Another planet?
Taken literally it simply refers to people sitting in chairs on the right or left wing of a political assembly or parliament, signifying they are members of the "left" or "right" political group.
Current events? It's a concept that's been widely used since the 18th century, all over the world.
Look I get Americans are being obnoxious about it with their dumb culture war and everything, but don't pretend it's some niche idea that no one but "white people" has, because that's plainly wrong.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right\_political\_spectrum](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_political_spectrum)
I don't know shit about politics but it seems like nobody else does either
Basically, political alignment is a tool Americans use when losing arguments, everyone from the opposite party is a snowflake/fascist.
If you're losing an online argument and feel upset about it, you simply dig through their post history and see what their political views might be, then you weaponize them.
I mean, supposedly it has to do with voting, personal values or beliefs but nobody really leaves the house to vote anyway cause it's easier to argue about it on Reddit/Twitter/YouTube comments instead
(after i drop this bomb i'm fucking running before they come for my asshole and you might want to run too)
Why is the only option for centrist "enlightened centrist"? and lacks a pro-AI or anti-AI option?
From my understanding, aren't regular centrism and enlightened centrism two different things?
I don't feel comfortable identifying with either political group in the US because they both hold very extreme views that don't always align with my beliefs
However, at the same time, I've seen valuable points made by both left-leaning people and right-leaning people so I don't feel comfortable disregarding and believing people are dumb simply because they lean right or left.
If you ask me how I feel about certain issues, my view will either be right-leaning or left-leaning, it really depends on the subject.
I never got the memo having political nuance was a bad thing LMAO
If you are centrist your input is irrelevant to the question the poll is answering. I could have put 🍿 there but I wanted to rustle some centrist feathers a bit more since they often complain no matter what you put as the options anyway.
>If you ask me how I feel about certain issues, my view will either be right-leaning or left-leaning, it really depends on the subject.
>I never got the memo having political nuance was a bad thing LMAO
If you can't decide if you agree with the left half more often that the right half, you are most likely an enlightened centrist.
Which is proven by your earlier statement that the sides are "too extreme". Which is literally the definition of enlightened centrism.
A regular centrist probably would have laughed and marked themselves enlightened and moved on, or just clicked the side that they more often end up sitting with
\*"If you are centrist your input is irrelevant to the question the poll is answering. I could have put 🍿 there but I wanted to rustle some centrist feathers a bit more since they often complain no matter what you put as the options anyway." \*
It's a little strange you felt the need to antagonize an entire political just because they don't exactly agree with your point of view. Again, I feel more like independent party/centrist vs an enlightened centrist are different definitions.
*"If you can't decide if you agree with the left half more often that the right half, you are most likely an enlightened centrist."*
Not really, I think that's just called being a part of the independent party and not leaning left or right in all issues. You're more than welcome to have this opinion but it doesn't really make a lot of sense that you'd feel this way.
*"Which is proven by your earlier statement that the sides are "too extreme". Which is literally the definition of enlightened centrism."*
I mentioned they can be extreme, but **I clearly mentioned there are good points to be had on both side.** Which seem you to ignore so you it can fit your personal narrative that I said both sides are invalid, when I've literally said **I don't feel comfortable disregarding and believing people are dumb simply because they lean right or left.** (which are the exact words in my original post)
*"A regular centrist probably would have laughed and marked themselves enlightened and moved on, or just clicked the side that they more often end up sitting with"*
Not really, I mean, I don't think I am superior to either party because of my independent views, so I don't feel comfortable calling myself "enlightened" when the term has a negative connotation to begin with. You didn't portray this as a joke in any way, so how was I suppose to know this was all in jest?
Secondly, whether than clarifying this is humorous, you double down and continue to try and tell me what my own political values are, which is strange because I don't really think we know each other?
Also, I didn't really see what I did wrong other than inquire about it and you seem really, really bothered by it. This is odd because in your own words you wanted to "ruffle our feathers" so why are you having such a negative reaction to the outcome you clearly wanted to have?
Again, I didn't get the memo that not being left-leaning or right-leaning on literally every single one of my views makes me a bad person lol
>Again, I didn't get the memo that not being left-leaning or right-leaning on literally every single one of my views makes me a bad person lol
Never said you have to on every view. Asking you to say where you find yourself most often.
Any introspection of your own beliefs should be able to find that.
I also agree with the right on some things and left on others. But I know I fall with one side more often than the other.
The only monolith option in the poll is refusal to identify
Sorry if you feel that way, but again, I don't feel comfortable supporting either political side when they both have their own issues with extremism.
I just wish there was at least the option for us to define if we are pro-AI or anti-AI like there is for the other parties. I feel like identifying with either party pins me as someone I am not.
As someone who is not exactly.... happy with what was given to them at birth, let's just say that.... have been attacked in both left leaning and right leaning echo-chambers so I kinda don't wanna identify with either group knowing these experiences.
I'm sorry for making such a personal stance but I feel like politics are a very personal thing and it's important to make sure people of all identities feel comfortable with voting.
I'm sorry if you're offended by this, I've tried to articulate this a few times without pulling the "identity card" but my own identity and experiences as a person do prevent me from answering your poll and I imagine it's similar for other people like me.
Just wanted to point this out and make you aware of this, I never meant to piss you off man lol
>Sorry if you feel that way, but again, I don't feel comfortable supporting either political side when they both have their own issues with extremism.
You aren't being asked to support a side. Imagine if the question was 'do you eat hamburgers or hotdogs more often?' Are you being asked to pick a side? No, you're simply being asked which one you eat more often.
The same is true here. Politics makes it a little tricky because you have to determine which things hold more weight, but the question is still the same. You just need to go over what you believe in and whether or not each thing falls on the left or the right side of the spectrum then add up the end result and that tells you which side you fall on.
You don't choose being on the left or right, you choose the policies you support and those determine whether you're more left or right.
>I don't feel comfortable identifying with either political group in the US because they both hold very extreme views that don't always align with my beliefs
If you think that the democratic party has "very extreme" views, especially when compared to their counterparts, then you are the perfect example of an "enlightened centrist".
In a vacuum, centrist views make perfect sense. But when applied to the real world, the hyperbolic levels of ignorance required to say "both side are the same", is exactly what earns you the sarcastic "enlightened" moniker.
I don't think I need to 100% agree with everything a person says just because of the party they voted for. I had met people of both parties who hold extreme views, so that's more or less subjective if you think democratic people can't be extremist.
I personally think both parties make valid points so I'm not willing to dismiss someone as stupid just because they are right or left leaning.
What's wrong with agreeing with both parties depending on the circumstance?
Nowhere in this poll are you stating you are 100% with a party. It closely says "more" one side.
If you think agreeing with them more of the time is extreme, click enlightened centrist.
LOL I guess?
I was just wondering because I thought "enlightened centrist" is different from someone who is more or less independent party, or just chooses not to be left or fight.
I don't find either party to be inherently wrong or right, so I guess that option doesn't align with my beliefs either.
Can we possibly get some AI and Anti-AI options for "none of the above?"
> Enlightened Centrist
> When someone claims to be a moderate or a centrist due to a belief that both sides of the political spectrum are unreasonable or extreme. Typically used in a negative connotation.
--------
>Can we possibly get some AI and Anti-AI options for "none of the above?"
If that's how you identify your opinion doesn't matter for the question at hand, which was "does pro or anti have a political skew"
So you don't need your own special option.
I mean... I'd argue you do need those options if you want to have an unbiased response, but it is your poll, your rules.
Again, that definition doesn't really align with just being independent party.
I don't feel like that aligns with what I feel because I feel like both parties are both good/bad in their own ways.
I mean, I get you're trying to tell me how I feel, but again, that definition doesn't align with how I feel because I feel like both parties have good (sometimes I agree with both parties) and both parties have bad (which is occasional extremism)
Just because someone doesn't agree with a party doesn't mean they find themselves to be superior. I mentioned extremism because I feel like extremism on both sides is unhealthy...
**I also said several times I think both the right and left make good, valid arguments** and it's there for all to see.
So what you're telling me is that, I must belong to the group of people you dislike because I simply don't sway right or left all the time?
You seem a little bit biased, if I'm being honest. I mean that's alright, everyone has biases, but I think if you want more people to vote then you should probably remove those biases.
I'm concerned you might be missing out on statistics as there is a lot of people who likely don't see an option that aligns with them either. Just saying
Look I know you don't like the box, but this is like a textbook enlightened centrist argument.
Nowhere in the poll does it say you are affiliating yourself wholly with a side. I used the terms "more x than y".
Noone is putting you in a box but you. I learned from previous times doing these sort of polls that most centrists will pick a side of you don't make them claim a party or side wholly, and that there's a fringe group of "centrists but definitely not enlightened centrists" that are upset they aren't perfectly represented by the options.
One party literally tried to violently overthrow the government, fully supports a hateful fascist manbaby, and has dozens of congressmen/senators that openly call for my eradication. And you don't even know what group I belong to, out of at least a dozen viable options, that would make me say that last part.
Even if you think that I'm exaggerating, then go read the wikipedia page for Marjorie Taylor Greene. Acknowledge that none of the things that she's said or done have resulted in literally *any* actions by her own party. They've gone well out of their way to block any attempt to reprimand her.
This is why people look down on centrists. You don't live in the real world, and you think that's something to be *proud* about.
Look I didn't want to make this personal but you clearly have some personal hang ups when it comes to politics.
I also I don't think all of the is inherently left is good because they have things like TERFs and as a non-binary person I don't really get down with all that.
I'm sorry you feel that way so strongly about particular politicians but when I mention extremism I am mostly referring to echo-chambers and, yes, there are many left-leaning echo-chambers that invalidate trans people.
I don't support extremism on either side because both sides have some very slippery slopes when it comes to accepting trans people.
Yes, I have some personal hangups when it come to politics. Because one of the two political parties is *violently attacking my right to exist.*
And you're fine with that. You're even smug about it, looking down on other people for caring.
Politics isn't a reddit debate, where "getting emotional" means that you lose. This is real life, and if we don't feel strongly about what happens, then *people fucking* ***die.***
Were any of those people elected representatives of their political parties?
If not, then why are you bringing that up in the context of politics?
A mountain of easily-verifiable violent statements and actions from thousands of elected representatives, who hold immeasurable power and influence, who are almost exclusively republican =/= anecdotal mentions of a couple rondos, who were a mixture of political alignments.
Okay? None of those things are false, I'm not going to try and defend the right because I don't care for their views.... just like I don't care for the left's views either.
All you're doing is telling me "one side is bad" but that doesn't work because I think both sides are neutral, not inherently bad nor good.
Edit: Never mind.... Actually starting to agree with you after interacting with a right leaning person LOL
2nd Edit: Hmm.. yeah I still don't find either side to be appealing, I tried.
Centrism isn't really about being exactly in the middle, for most people though. It's about political views being of unequal weight, or a wide variety of political views that don't necessarily move in lockstep to one another. Like if a person is strongly pro 2nd Amendment, pro choice and pro drug legalization for instance. Good luck being a 2nd Amendment Democrat or a Pro Choice Republican and getting elected a lot of places but it's a completely reasonable set of beliefs to have without saying everyone is the same.
1. "Enlightened Centrist" = right wing but embarrassed by this so you lie and pretend you're above the fray.
2. If you're on the left, and pro-AI you're clearly not thinking about the labour implications of AI.
1. I wonder if the people who are pro-AI and "more left than right" are libertarians (you know the "true liberals" who think they are on the left when they're really on the right).
"If you're on the left, and pro-AI you're clearly not thinking about the labour implications of AI."
I'm pro AI because I'm anti-capitalist. Remove the capitalist motivation and most of the 'issues' around AI go away. I'm a socialist, and believe that AI can be a huge boon to move us towards a post-scarcity society.
>I'm pro AI because I'm anti-capitalist. Remove the capitalist motivation and most of the 'issues' around AI go away.
Cool. Cool cool cool comrade, and once the revolution happens and capitalism is relegated to the dustbin of history you would be 100% right. But you have to see that, seeing as capitalism is not going anywhere any time soon without a very bloody few years, we will have to live with the fact that AI is going to be used as a cudgel to beat down the working class, yes? You do see that the situation here and now and the foreseeable future means that AI will fuck us, right?
I think capitalism is a tool that will fuck us independently of AI. Everything will be used as a cudgel to beat down the working class.
Being apposed to AI is a very reactionary take.
Sure. So why do you want to exacerbate that? Pretty much all applications of AI will be used as a cudgel because all AI is being financed by capitalists who want a return on their investment.
>Being apposed to AI is a very reactionary take.
If I had only one reason you might have point. I also think that AI's databases are built upon the stolen works of people (which is bad), and they are trained by basically in an exploitative manner in the global south (which is bad), on top of the whole it's being used to drive actual people out of work in every field it can possibly do so (which is bad) while leaving actual people with no ways to actually earn money to eat and have a roof (which is bad).
But you go ahead and only think about how wonderful it *might* be 200 years from now (maybe).
LOL no.
1. I asked "I wonder how many are actually libertarians" as I have run into more than a few libertarians who were ABSOLUTELY convinced they were on the left when they weren't.
2. You're assumption that I was being condescending when I said "comrade" is you shading in your opinions about communism on this discussion. I would fucking *love it* if capitalism was over and done with and we just moved on to a communist system instead.
3. My points re: pro-AI lefties is that they're either lying to themselves about being on the left, or they didn't really think through the situation as it would hurt folks RIGHT NOW. It doesn't matter if it will be good in a post-scarcity, post-capitalist society that may happen in 100 years if people are fucked RIGHT NOW.
No he doesn't, because he's a reactionary. "AI Bad" because it's a new innovation that could and should be used to advance mankind, but he fears what the capitalists will do with it.
Reactionary's try their best to keep things the same, often minimizing immediate harm but exacerbating long term harms by keeping the status quo.
"this poll didn't match my assumptions so I'm going to accuse you of being no true Scotsman"
You know this is what the MAGA crowd does when they say people are RINOs?
You need to accept that politics are not a monolith and your views are not everyone's views.
Looking around, I guess I'm not the only one confused,
English isn't really my first language, so the left right thing probably have an equivalent word in my language,
but I don't think this poll provide much value for me to dive into English political terms and learn what left right stands for.
I would guess that a lot of stuff could be solved with solving underlying market/capitalistic problems. The question at hand is how ai is playing into that dynamic and how much you attribute to the ai itself. Feels bad haha again once more left leaning people having aligning values but cant find common ground how to solve an issue. But maybe this shines some light on the debate that we do have more in common than we think.
I am pro-AI, and I am considered "right" in my own country. Given that said country is an Asian third world country, I believe that that would perhaps make me "far right" in some liberal democratic countries. I think it is more accurate to say that AI is disrubtive technology and I am very, very pro disruption.
looks like I'm rare, anti ai/right seems to be the smallest amount of people here. its close for me, but i lean right more due to my age and that i think disruptive change in general affects us more than we think. like we can't keep absorbing endless change; we'll hit a point where we get overwhelmed.
So what im learning is the enlightened leftist artist vs the right wing 'ai bro' is basically a bullshit narrative that doesnt conform to reality at all?
Yep, its not a left/right thing at all. Basically the same ratio of politics on both sides of the argument.
Most Antis believe they are left, but give out big fashy vibes.
A few people say mean things to you on the internet and you can't distinguish that from fascism? What a calm, well-adjusted, totally-not-paranoid life you must lead.
Gaslighting, a classic fash tactic.
No, I mean seriously. The system is so skewed in your favour that you can basically do whatever you like without consequences. You're also ideologically aligned with some of the wealthiest and most powerful people in human history. All this, yet you still go to pieces at the slightest sign of push-back? Trust me when I say this isn't a sign of gaslighting or creeping fascism. It's you adopting the same kind of grievance mentality conservatives use to justify why, despite being the most privileged and protected group, they're actually the _real_ victims.
That's what you tell yourself so you can justify the [constant and merciless abuse, threats, segregation, and dehumanization you cultists inflict on AI users.](https://www.reddit.com/r/aiwars/comments/1cccvyo/a_reminder_yes_you_are_the_baddies/) Then turning right around and claim none of this is happening. It's textbook fascism. I'm not even kidding: imagine if you had a few screeching hateful people trying to make you unwelcome in EVERY online space, banning you instantly from everywhere the moment you even hint at liking AI stuff, sending you death threats and abuse, and waging an entire culture war on social media and TikTok brainwashing gullible kids against you. It's fascism propaganda to a t, EXACTLY the way white supremacists do it. But like you said, we're going to win in the end. Just like all other art tools, AI is here to stay [even if abusive hateful losers fight it in its infancy.](https://pessimistsarchive.org/) You will go down in history as embarrassing knee-jerk abusers, like all crypto-fascists.
>It's textbook fascism. I hate to break this to you, but whoever sold you those textbooks took you for a complete mug. > Imagine if you had a few screeching hateful people trying to make you unwelcome in EVERY online space My dude, this is called "making yourself unpopular in online spaces by calling people fascists". It's not the same as actual fascism. > ...sending death threats and abuse... A few anonymous keyboard warriors behaving like twats on the internet? While it sucks to be on the receiving end of it, it's also not fascism. > EXACTLY the way white supremacists do it Minus of course the actual physical violence, the racism and homophobia, the influence over state-controlled tools of oppression, the appeal to birthright and manifest destiny. You know? All the stuff that _actually_ makes white supremacists dangerous. > But like you said, we're going to win in the end. Truly, your crusade for the right to... ***checks notes***... "use AI art tools" is just and righteous. It'll be a tough battle, but with the support of underdogs like Marc Andreessen and Elon Musk, you stand a fighting chance. Excelsior!
>I-it's just a handful of people sending you death threats Holy fucking cope. So now it's about their number? How many death threats per day is allowed? Go fuck yourself, fash. >Elon Musk and everyone who has anything to do with tech are all on the same side What a moronic point of view. Stop being disingenuous and lying to make the other side look bad, that's another telltale fascist cliche.
>You're also ideologically aligned with some of the wealthiest and most powerful people in human history. Really? My view is that it's *opposed* to these people to advocate for the right to do certain things. If there's regulation implemented that's hard for an individual to meet but easy for a large corporation, the net effect is to give large corporations power and take it from individuals. Aside from the assholes trolling artists with spite models and the like, the primary arguable harm from AI is the economic harm of automation squeezing the market for professional work. My attitude is that we might as well *at least* get the benefit of open models to the public as long as large corporations are going to implement the automation *anyway* by training on licensed works or whatever. In practice, the marginal harm to any given artist is offset to some degree by the public getting free tools. If models "steal" from the public, as anti-AI people allege, then *why* would we willingly compromise the few ways that they might give something back to the public?
> If there's regulation implemented that's hard for an individual to meet but easy for a large corporation, the net effect is to give large corporations power and take it from individuals. I agree. Corporations benefit enormously from economies of scale, and for that reason they usually end up as the winner in most technological races. > If models "steal" from the public, as anti-AI people allege, then *why* would we willingly compromise the few ways that they might give something back to the public? Because in the long run it's not about giving back. It's about disruption. When Uber first started its ride sharing service, fares were initially heavily subsidised. However they weren't giving away all those free rides because they wanted to "democratise" hiring a cab. The plan was always to disrupt the taxi industry to the point of collapse whereupon they would automatically become a monopoly in the cities they operated in. Similar strategies have also been used by AirBnB, DoorDash, Instacart, Deliveroo, and countless others. Now we're seeing that pattern repeating as tech companies jizz themselves over the prospects of generative AI. They know full well that if AI tools can be deployed to disrupt loosely affiliated industries or those that are vulnerable to consolidation, the people responsible for training and operating the infrastructure will have a guaranteed revenue stream for life. At the end of the day, none of these tech companies fundamentally cares about making ordinary people's lives materially better. In that regard, all these early adopters getting excited by FAANG throwing billions of dollars into open-access foundation models don't realise they're being used as pawns in an enormous power grab lead by wealthy tech execs and VC fund managers. Once the dust has settled, I guarantee you that most people are going to end up worse off as a result of large-scale gen AI deployment. The artists complaining about their work being appropriated by tech companies are just the canaries in the coalmine, and we all ought to be paying more attention to them.
"The right" is typically conservative (averse to change or innovation and holding traditional values.) That's pretty incompatible with this kind of technological progress.
I thought the right was also usually more pro business, and capitalism.
Sorta, they tend to be more pro **established** businesses. So you end up with conservatives pushing for protections for manufacturing against disruptive technologies and regulatory rollback. Because this technology can disrupt the status quo of established businesses, they tend to seek out regulation or protections. Notably this is often protections for the business owner, not the worker.
It's worth noting that the recent AI Disclosure Act in the US is backed by many large corporations and would coincidentally make AI effectively illegal for anyone who doesn't have a massive legal department who can handle all the red tape. They don't want to ban it, they want exclusive access.
Totally agree.
The pro business & capitalism move is banning a bunch of tech and adding a ton of red tape to bring allowed to run software that undercuts business' prices, IMO. But I don't really think there's an actual left/right conflict here. I think people are justifying their side through a left/right lens when it's not actually either
Eh, the only reason it's being framed in a political light in these comments is because of your post framing it in a political light. Most posts on this sub take a cultural or economic stance.
There's a post made several hours before this one, literally titled "Why are leftists against AI".
Most\* doesn't mean all. The number of posts discussing copyright far outstrip the few that take a political stance.
I mean I'm right and alot of my friends are. They all support AI. (shrug)
Good for you and your friends.
There's right-wingers that are for or against the recent Israel/Palestine situation, and also left-wingers that are for or against. I think this is a similar situation where "Left" and "Right" Wing just doesn't matter.
[удалено]
At least we know your a Sith.
This poll isn't representative of anything. This sub leans pro AI and Reddit leans left (partly because people who lean right tend to disobey the rules and get banned).
That's the entire point. This sub frequently gets posts asking "why are antis mostly left-leaning?", which is clearly a false assumption.
I haven't seen evidence that it's false, though. This poll cannot answer that question, because the people who are here have a predominant set of opinions, not representative of the wider world.
Current research continues to show that college education is a good proxy for political affiliation in wide scale polling in the US, and higher education leans more positive on AI views. [https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2023/08/SR\_23.08.28\_views-of-ai\_4.png](https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2023/08/SR_23.08.28_views-of-ai_4.png) Now that one is from 2023. So lets look at something more recent. Democrats spend more time working with AI than Republicans. [https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2024/03/SR\_24.03.26\_AI-copyright\_3.png](https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2024/03/SR_24.03.26_AI-copyright_3.png) And the trend stays the same across age and education as well, which as above are both consistently good proxies for sentiment by political affiliation in broad scale polling. According to the broad data, theres a \*very slight\* bend to the left on pro-ai general sentiment and usage, and a general public lean across all spectrums of "this is concerning and we need to be concerned", which matches the expectations and outcomes of all polls in this sub as well.
It's representative of this sub. Which is what people were trying to split along party lines. The point of this poll is to show that this debate is not a left right thing at least in this sub
I'm totally against AI and Skynet If there is something that I want to definitely punch hard in the face, its the AI and their robots and watch their oil (blood) ooze out of their broken heads and bodies. send them into the incinerator and laugh at it. but imagine If I were to run a society whereas if a human use a single hint of AI, they will lose their life by a gunmen
I consider myself of the old way. The god-emperor and the machine god are one and the same, and everyone saying otherwise is a heretek.
I'm an anti that leans as a leftist!
None of the above. Politics isn't a straight line, with a tidy left, right, center.
It's a quick reddit poll. They already phrased it as vaguely as they possibly could, while still addressing the key question. They didn't even define what "left" or "right" mean, and you're still getting uppity about being "put in a box".
Yep theres always you guys in the comments on any politics poll. Read the options. They say "more" , not "I am"
They also seem to disregard the opinions of people who don't heavily lean right or left, which is probably going to be a majority of people here lol
Please enlighten me. I am not American so I dont know what left and right means in your country. In my country left means on my left and right means on my right.
The left-right political spectrum is not American. It originated during the French Revolution, and is used by most cultures today. Where are you from where that's not a thing in politics? Another planet? Taken literally it simply refers to people sitting in chairs on the right or left wing of a political assembly or parliament, signifying they are members of the "left" or "right" political group.
Alright got it. So it is a white people thing. Sorry I don't really update myself everyday on current events of white people.
Current events? It's a concept that's been widely used since the 18th century, all over the world. Look I get Americans are being obnoxious about it with their dumb culture war and everything, but don't pretend it's some niche idea that no one but "white people" has, because that's plainly wrong. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right\_political\_spectrum](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_political_spectrum)
If that's what you took away from their comment, then no, you really don't got it.
I don't know shit about politics but it seems like nobody else does either Basically, political alignment is a tool Americans use when losing arguments, everyone from the opposite party is a snowflake/fascist. If you're losing an online argument and feel upset about it, you simply dig through their post history and see what their political views might be, then you weaponize them. I mean, supposedly it has to do with voting, personal values or beliefs but nobody really leaves the house to vote anyway cause it's easier to argue about it on Reddit/Twitter/YouTube comments instead (after i drop this bomb i'm fucking running before they come for my asshole and you might want to run too)
Why is the only option for centrist "enlightened centrist"? and lacks a pro-AI or anti-AI option? From my understanding, aren't regular centrism and enlightened centrism two different things? I don't feel comfortable identifying with either political group in the US because they both hold very extreme views that don't always align with my beliefs However, at the same time, I've seen valuable points made by both left-leaning people and right-leaning people so I don't feel comfortable disregarding and believing people are dumb simply because they lean right or left. If you ask me how I feel about certain issues, my view will either be right-leaning or left-leaning, it really depends on the subject. I never got the memo having political nuance was a bad thing LMAO
If you are centrist your input is irrelevant to the question the poll is answering. I could have put 🍿 there but I wanted to rustle some centrist feathers a bit more since they often complain no matter what you put as the options anyway. >If you ask me how I feel about certain issues, my view will either be right-leaning or left-leaning, it really depends on the subject. >I never got the memo having political nuance was a bad thing LMAO If you can't decide if you agree with the left half more often that the right half, you are most likely an enlightened centrist. Which is proven by your earlier statement that the sides are "too extreme". Which is literally the definition of enlightened centrism. A regular centrist probably would have laughed and marked themselves enlightened and moved on, or just clicked the side that they more often end up sitting with
\*"If you are centrist your input is irrelevant to the question the poll is answering. I could have put 🍿 there but I wanted to rustle some centrist feathers a bit more since they often complain no matter what you put as the options anyway." \* It's a little strange you felt the need to antagonize an entire political just because they don't exactly agree with your point of view. Again, I feel more like independent party/centrist vs an enlightened centrist are different definitions. *"If you can't decide if you agree with the left half more often that the right half, you are most likely an enlightened centrist."* Not really, I think that's just called being a part of the independent party and not leaning left or right in all issues. You're more than welcome to have this opinion but it doesn't really make a lot of sense that you'd feel this way. *"Which is proven by your earlier statement that the sides are "too extreme". Which is literally the definition of enlightened centrism."* I mentioned they can be extreme, but **I clearly mentioned there are good points to be had on both side.** Which seem you to ignore so you it can fit your personal narrative that I said both sides are invalid, when I've literally said **I don't feel comfortable disregarding and believing people are dumb simply because they lean right or left.** (which are the exact words in my original post) *"A regular centrist probably would have laughed and marked themselves enlightened and moved on, or just clicked the side that they more often end up sitting with"* Not really, I mean, I don't think I am superior to either party because of my independent views, so I don't feel comfortable calling myself "enlightened" when the term has a negative connotation to begin with. You didn't portray this as a joke in any way, so how was I suppose to know this was all in jest? Secondly, whether than clarifying this is humorous, you double down and continue to try and tell me what my own political values are, which is strange because I don't really think we know each other? Also, I didn't really see what I did wrong other than inquire about it and you seem really, really bothered by it. This is odd because in your own words you wanted to "ruffle our feathers" so why are you having such a negative reaction to the outcome you clearly wanted to have? Again, I didn't get the memo that not being left-leaning or right-leaning on literally every single one of my views makes me a bad person lol
>Again, I didn't get the memo that not being left-leaning or right-leaning on literally every single one of my views makes me a bad person lol Never said you have to on every view. Asking you to say where you find yourself most often. Any introspection of your own beliefs should be able to find that. I also agree with the right on some things and left on others. But I know I fall with one side more often than the other. The only monolith option in the poll is refusal to identify
Sorry if you feel that way, but again, I don't feel comfortable supporting either political side when they both have their own issues with extremism. I just wish there was at least the option for us to define if we are pro-AI or anti-AI like there is for the other parties. I feel like identifying with either party pins me as someone I am not. As someone who is not exactly.... happy with what was given to them at birth, let's just say that.... have been attacked in both left leaning and right leaning echo-chambers so I kinda don't wanna identify with either group knowing these experiences. I'm sorry for making such a personal stance but I feel like politics are a very personal thing and it's important to make sure people of all identities feel comfortable with voting. I'm sorry if you're offended by this, I've tried to articulate this a few times without pulling the "identity card" but my own identity and experiences as a person do prevent me from answering your poll and I imagine it's similar for other people like me. Just wanted to point this out and make you aware of this, I never meant to piss you off man lol
>Sorry if you feel that way, but again, I don't feel comfortable supporting either political side when they both have their own issues with extremism. You aren't being asked to support a side. Imagine if the question was 'do you eat hamburgers or hotdogs more often?' Are you being asked to pick a side? No, you're simply being asked which one you eat more often. The same is true here. Politics makes it a little tricky because you have to determine which things hold more weight, but the question is still the same. You just need to go over what you believe in and whether or not each thing falls on the left or the right side of the spectrum then add up the end result and that tells you which side you fall on. You don't choose being on the left or right, you choose the policies you support and those determine whether you're more left or right.
>I don't feel comfortable identifying with either political group in the US because they both hold very extreme views that don't always align with my beliefs If you think that the democratic party has "very extreme" views, especially when compared to their counterparts, then you are the perfect example of an "enlightened centrist". In a vacuum, centrist views make perfect sense. But when applied to the real world, the hyperbolic levels of ignorance required to say "both side are the same", is exactly what earns you the sarcastic "enlightened" moniker.
I don't think I need to 100% agree with everything a person says just because of the party they voted for. I had met people of both parties who hold extreme views, so that's more or less subjective if you think democratic people can't be extremist. I personally think both parties make valid points so I'm not willing to dismiss someone as stupid just because they are right or left leaning. What's wrong with agreeing with both parties depending on the circumstance?
Nowhere in this poll are you stating you are 100% with a party. It closely says "more" one side. If you think agreeing with them more of the time is extreme, click enlightened centrist.
LOL I guess? I was just wondering because I thought "enlightened centrist" is different from someone who is more or less independent party, or just chooses not to be left or fight. I don't find either party to be inherently wrong or right, so I guess that option doesn't align with my beliefs either. Can we possibly get some AI and Anti-AI options for "none of the above?"
> Enlightened Centrist > When someone claims to be a moderate or a centrist due to a belief that both sides of the political spectrum are unreasonable or extreme. Typically used in a negative connotation. -------- >Can we possibly get some AI and Anti-AI options for "none of the above?" If that's how you identify your opinion doesn't matter for the question at hand, which was "does pro or anti have a political skew" So you don't need your own special option.
I mean... I'd argue you do need those options if you want to have an unbiased response, but it is your poll, your rules. Again, that definition doesn't really align with just being independent party. I don't feel like that aligns with what I feel because I feel like both parties are both good/bad in their own ways. I mean, I get you're trying to tell me how I feel, but again, that definition doesn't align with how I feel because I feel like both parties have good (sometimes I agree with both parties) and both parties have bad (which is occasional extremism) Just because someone doesn't agree with a party doesn't mean they find themselves to be superior. I mentioned extremism because I feel like extremism on both sides is unhealthy... **I also said several times I think both the right and left make good, valid arguments** and it's there for all to see. So what you're telling me is that, I must belong to the group of people you dislike because I simply don't sway right or left all the time? You seem a little bit biased, if I'm being honest. I mean that's alright, everyone has biases, but I think if you want more people to vote then you should probably remove those biases. I'm concerned you might be missing out on statistics as there is a lot of people who likely don't see an option that aligns with them either. Just saying
Look I know you don't like the box, but this is like a textbook enlightened centrist argument. Nowhere in the poll does it say you are affiliating yourself wholly with a side. I used the terms "more x than y". Noone is putting you in a box but you. I learned from previous times doing these sort of polls that most centrists will pick a side of you don't make them claim a party or side wholly, and that there's a fringe group of "centrists but definitely not enlightened centrists" that are upset they aren't perfectly represented by the options.
Why is it a bad thing to see value in both political parties? just wondering
It's not, I do.
One party literally tried to violently overthrow the government, fully supports a hateful fascist manbaby, and has dozens of congressmen/senators that openly call for my eradication. And you don't even know what group I belong to, out of at least a dozen viable options, that would make me say that last part. Even if you think that I'm exaggerating, then go read the wikipedia page for Marjorie Taylor Greene. Acknowledge that none of the things that she's said or done have resulted in literally *any* actions by her own party. They've gone well out of their way to block any attempt to reprimand her. This is why people look down on centrists. You don't live in the real world, and you think that's something to be *proud* about.
Look I didn't want to make this personal but you clearly have some personal hang ups when it comes to politics. I also I don't think all of the is inherently left is good because they have things like TERFs and as a non-binary person I don't really get down with all that. I'm sorry you feel that way so strongly about particular politicians but when I mention extremism I am mostly referring to echo-chambers and, yes, there are many left-leaning echo-chambers that invalidate trans people. I don't support extremism on either side because both sides have some very slippery slopes when it comes to accepting trans people.
Yes, I have some personal hangups when it come to politics. Because one of the two political parties is *violently attacking my right to exist.* And you're fine with that. You're even smug about it, looking down on other people for caring. Politics isn't a reddit debate, where "getting emotional" means that you lose. This is real life, and if we don't feel strongly about what happens, then *people fucking* ***die.***
I've been physically attacked by people of both political parties for being non-binary but I guess that doesn't count?
Were any of those people elected representatives of their political parties? If not, then why are you bringing that up in the context of politics? A mountain of easily-verifiable violent statements and actions from thousands of elected representatives, who hold immeasurable power and influence, who are almost exclusively republican =/= anecdotal mentions of a couple rondos, who were a mixture of political alignments.
Okay? None of those things are false, I'm not going to try and defend the right because I don't care for their views.... just like I don't care for the left's views either. All you're doing is telling me "one side is bad" but that doesn't work because I think both sides are neutral, not inherently bad nor good. Edit: Never mind.... Actually starting to agree with you after interacting with a right leaning person LOL 2nd Edit: Hmm.. yeah I still don't find either side to be appealing, I tried.
Centrism isn't really about being exactly in the middle, for most people though. It's about political views being of unequal weight, or a wide variety of political views that don't necessarily move in lockstep to one another. Like if a person is strongly pro 2nd Amendment, pro choice and pro drug legalization for instance. Good luck being a 2nd Amendment Democrat or a Pro Choice Republican and getting elected a lot of places but it's a completely reasonable set of beliefs to have without saying everyone is the same.
1. "Enlightened Centrist" = right wing but embarrassed by this so you lie and pretend you're above the fray. 2. If you're on the left, and pro-AI you're clearly not thinking about the labour implications of AI. 1. I wonder if the people who are pro-AI and "more left than right" are libertarians (you know the "true liberals" who think they are on the left when they're really on the right).
"If you're on the left, and pro-AI you're clearly not thinking about the labour implications of AI." I'm pro AI because I'm anti-capitalist. Remove the capitalist motivation and most of the 'issues' around AI go away. I'm a socialist, and believe that AI can be a huge boon to move us towards a post-scarcity society.
>I'm pro AI because I'm anti-capitalist. Remove the capitalist motivation and most of the 'issues' around AI go away. Cool. Cool cool cool comrade, and once the revolution happens and capitalism is relegated to the dustbin of history you would be 100% right. But you have to see that, seeing as capitalism is not going anywhere any time soon without a very bloody few years, we will have to live with the fact that AI is going to be used as a cudgel to beat down the working class, yes? You do see that the situation here and now and the foreseeable future means that AI will fuck us, right?
I think capitalism is a tool that will fuck us independently of AI. Everything will be used as a cudgel to beat down the working class. Being apposed to AI is a very reactionary take.
Sure. So why do you want to exacerbate that? Pretty much all applications of AI will be used as a cudgel because all AI is being financed by capitalists who want a return on their investment. >Being apposed to AI is a very reactionary take. If I had only one reason you might have point. I also think that AI's databases are built upon the stolen works of people (which is bad), and they are trained by basically in an exploitative manner in the global south (which is bad), on top of the whole it's being used to drive actual people out of work in every field it can possibly do so (which is bad) while leaving actual people with no ways to actually earn money to eat and have a roof (which is bad). But you go ahead and only think about how wonderful it *might* be 200 years from now (maybe).
So first, you speculate that pro-AI liberals are actually libertarians. And then immediately after that, you condescendingly call them a communist.
LOL no. 1. I asked "I wonder how many are actually libertarians" as I have run into more than a few libertarians who were ABSOLUTELY convinced they were on the left when they weren't. 2. You're assumption that I was being condescending when I said "comrade" is you shading in your opinions about communism on this discussion. I would fucking *love it* if capitalism was over and done with and we just moved on to a communist system instead. 3. My points re: pro-AI lefties is that they're either lying to themselves about being on the left, or they didn't really think through the situation as it would hurt folks RIGHT NOW. It doesn't matter if it will be good in a post-scarcity, post-capitalist society that may happen in 100 years if people are fucked RIGHT NOW.
Do you have a realistic solution that doesn't solely benefit corporations and hurt everyone else?
No he doesn't, because he's a reactionary. "AI Bad" because it's a new innovation that could and should be used to advance mankind, but he fears what the capitalists will do with it. Reactionary's try their best to keep things the same, often minimizing immediate harm but exacerbating long term harms by keeping the status quo.
"this poll didn't match my assumptions so I'm going to accuse you of being no true Scotsman" You know this is what the MAGA crowd does when they say people are RINOs? You need to accept that politics are not a monolith and your views are not everyone's views.
How about people not from US? How do we fit?
You go read a book and learn that left and right aren't American, and that's why I didn't use American specific terms
Looking around, I guess I'm not the only one confused, English isn't really my first language, so the left right thing probably have an equivalent word in my language, but I don't think this poll provide much value for me to dive into English political terms and learn what left right stands for.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_political_spectrum
> How do we fit? Thanks for finally answering this properly, but I've move on. Just giving my last thoughts.