> You're just mad because after 100 years of industrialization it's finally coming after your job.

what's your plan for when the only humans needed for the world economy to function are Musk and Zuckerberg?

you certainly won't be needed

Hasn't that been the goal of humanity since the first tool was invented?

to engineer modern feudalism?

I don't think so

To have robots do all the work.

Why would the ones who control the robots keep you and your descendants alive and enjoying the wealth generated from the robot work if you provide no value to them?

To hell with progress. I don't want to live in the future where corporate black box AIs generate everything society considers "art" and "culture", where no one knows how to so much as code a for loop or draw a stick figure because human expression no longer has an outlet. I don't want to simply be forced to adapt to a life where my only option is to blindly consume what the machines feed me like I'm in a tube in the Matrix.

Yes. It does make me mad. And I should be mad. Everyone who cares about anything but the bottom line should be mad. The wholesale commoditization and destruction of human intellectual skill and creative talent in service of the relentless pursuit of capitalism through automation is a bad thing and you should feel bad for cheering it on. "Adapt or get left behind" isn't what someone who actually cares about the quality of their craft says, it's what the Borg say before injecting their nanoprobes into your brain. "we only want to improve quality of life." Fuck that.

I appreciate your righteous screed. I imagine it won't be a decade before we see a fork in society between those who embrace a UBI and a world filled with bots, centaurs and llm-mediated-hive-minds and those who simply want nothing to do with it.

Maybe the luddites made it clear that destroying capital doesn't make for a winning endgame, the Amish might be a better model - they still participate in the broader economy but they've built their pockets of antiquity where they get by with more elbow grease than they otherwise would have to, and have a spiritual basis for meaning that most of secular society lacks. I probably won't be joining them but could see a new movement that accepts diesel engines, lithium batteries and computers, but draws the line at anything that starts to mention "hidden layers" or "nondeterministic behavoir" (outside that randomness needed for accurate simulations and cryptography)

Haven't come up with a name yet.

The existence of AI art does not mean that human art won't be created.

>I don't want to simply be forced to adapt to a life where my only option is to blindly consume what the machines feed me like I'm in a tube in the Matrix.

How is that any different from your life now, except it's humans feeding you slop instead of human-guided machines?

>Everyone who cares about anything but the bottom line should be mad. The wholesale commoditization and destruction of human intellectual skill and creative talent in service of the relentless pursuit of capitalism through automation is a bad thing and you should feel bad for cheering it on

Go join an Amish commune then. I love the irony of a programmer (I'm assuming) complaining about automation.

"Progess" itself, as construed by these people at least, is a specter. It is an empty faith for the sycophants, and a tool of compliance for the stakeholders.

Hardly anyone ever asks where this progression is leading, and if they do, usually the answer is to "more progress." Which, to me, doesn't really sound like progression at all! It's just a way to justify not actually changing anything that matters, and to make sure there is always some faux-horizon of greener pastures to promise your customers.

You should be angry!

No, you don't understand the Luddite in the slightest.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/ae379k/luddites-definition-w...

https://doctorow.medium.com/brian-merchants-blood-in-the-mac...

https://www.buzzsprout.com/1004689/13638517