Because as long as it's "activism" you can do no wrong?

Who said that

I'm a person who believes an activist has already decided the conclusion and just finds whatever facts they need to fit their narrative. They also use BS terms like AI colonialism and other nonsensical meaningless words to manipulate people emotionally.

So yes I think this is claptrap of the first order that exists so people can pretend it's of any value to reaffirm their echo chamber.

"Colonialism is the practice by which a state or power extends and maintains political, social, economic, and cultural domination over a foreign territory and its people." -- And you see nothing about that seems like it could possibly be a way to describe the current AI landscape? Perhaps you jumping ship because you see a buzzword, or something you have decided is a buzzword is just you being mentally lazy?

No because I'm not captured ideologically. You can run open source models (which are ever improving) and there is no moat for AI neither in software or hardware. Look at yourself in the mirror and tell me it's not the pot calling the kettle black.

Colonialism is so overused as a term it's pointless. By this logic China is doing Electric car colonialism and Bangladesh apparel colonialism.

Everyone is captured ideologically. There is no view from nowhere.

The most complete capture is the one so internalized it doesn't even register as ideology anymore.

> You can run open source models

Who can run open source models? Everyone in the world, or only a small subset of the population with access to computing products that are powerful enough to run models? Who builds those computing products? Where do their raw materials come from? Where are they mined and processed? Who manufactures and assembles the parts?

> (which are ever improving)

How are they being improved? Are moderation and data labeling jobs usually done by the same people who consume the outputs of the models, or are they outsourced for paltry wages?

> there is no moat for AI neither in software or hardware

No moat for whom? Can the data labelers above start their own AI hardware company?

> Look at yourself in the mirror and tell me it's not the pot calling the kettle black

So we should settle for inaction?

> By this logic China is doing Electric car colonialism

Where does the lithium for electric car batteries come from? What about other rare minerals?

> Bangladesh apparel colonialism

Aren't the people in sweatshops the exploited ones? And the ones who consume the products of their labor the colonialists?

So China does engage in lithium colonialism and apparel colonialism? I'm struggling to parse that part of your comment.

I think the problem many people have with the word colonialism, besides the incredible amount of overuse and misuse, is that by the definition you provided you can label almost any international interaction as colonialism if there is even a slight imbalance by loosening the meaning of "domination". There are certainly countries that have dominated others e.g. China and Tibet but the vast majority have much more complex relationships. Take the US and Mexico, does the US dominate Mexico? They have a great deal of influence in Mexico but that doesn't seem to prevent the Mexican government or its people from acting in ways opposed to the US. They still have to negotiate treaties and enforce them imperfectly. For a strict definition of domination, this isn't it.

It helps to also attempt to imagine a total absence of colonialism. Using a strict definition of domination this isn't too difficult though it may still be unlikely to ever occur. Using a loose definition you have to assume a world in which no country has any political, social, economic or cultural advantage over another. The simplest way to do this is to imagine a world of total isolationism where no country interacts with any other. Either that or a world in which only a single nation (or perhaps only three) exists. Neither are the happiest nor most diverse outcomes one would wish for. Imagining a perfect balance seems impossible, international trade requires it, differences in population size, productivity and resource distribution enforce it. Beyond that how would you even start to prevent a difference in say cultural influence? Even among Western nations there are enormous cultural gradients. Canada has tried to mandate the distribution of its own cultural media within its borders but even that isn't enough to prevent being swamped by the sheer volume of output from the US. China has the Great Firewall and yet its citizenry still demands access to Western culture.

So for any definition of colonialism you should also provide and abide by a definition of domination.

That seems like an ad hominem attack to me, as you haven't really addressed conclusion the research points to: Why are all of the worst jobs in the industry predominantly exported to the global south?

I think it's easy to conclude that the companies can more easily exploit workers in these locations, which points to colonialism and capitalist incentives. Instead of dismissing someone's research because of guilt by association, perhaps you can explain why this is not an exploitative practice?