Artificial Intelligence

Paul Mason: “PostCapitalism” | Talks at Google

17Views

Disclaimer

27 Comments

  • there's absolutely nothing wrong with capitalism. but there's a big problem with neoliberalism corruption and lobbying. neoliberal economics uses outdated incorrect over-simplified economic models which don't reflect the real world. America could adopt MMT sound finance and job guarantee and it would be infinitely better off.

  • All this Google folk are so privileged, so full of their youth so they can not see that they will not be yang for ever. That world has Hundred millions may be even better trained and educated people who are not needed. Corporation believes they can get more from youth and there not enough creative jobs. Actually AI now killing jobs that were created in past. So, if you ever fall off ladder even temporary, because of crisis, for example, you are off it for ever.

  • funny to see that all these red leftist dumbasses do not even bother to think about PRODUCTION side… as true socialist parasites they start like dark age religious or communist mugs, that stuff is there, fixed, and the only problem is how to distribute the wealth… yeah, everything is free… stupiders… fortunately, once superintelligence pops up, humanimals become IRRELEVANT, since our sole purpose in the Grand Theatre of Evolution of Intelligence is to create our (first nonbio) successor

  • Richard Woolf gives great presentations on Marx and critique of capitalism and the effects on democracy. He and Chris Hedges make great backstop for Chomsky.

  • Once it is abundant no one thinks about…………..That was the gem in this discussion that should spark thought worthy of exploration and acknowledge the two edged sword and counter logic that cam play into the reason of mind set.

  • The only scarce resource that exists in this universe is intelligence. (AFAIK)

    Sure energy and materials do set the prices atm but that has more to do with the lack of minds that could easily procure them.

    Unless you restrict AI or near AI tech in regards to the wider populace; I don't see how any trace of today's capitalism could survive.

  • That sounds like bad reasoning. If I produce something at no cost that has value to someone it just allows me to improve my cost basis and improve the lives of everyone.

    Non profits are not new. They aren't ancient, but are far from new. People do all kinds of free work for public benefit. It has just become more efficient.

    Effeciencies will always improve results and drive prices down. His whole problem goes away if you consider IP as property that is a limited guaranteed Monopoly and you believe in value not cost based economics.

    His whole argument is a moral argument against IP being property for the greater good.

  • Great talk. Just wanted to address a crucial point made at 17:03 "How is it [capitalism] changing to defend itself against these problems? Well, you're [Google] sitting in one of the defense mechanisms."
    I'd go further and say that capitalism defends itself just like slavery or feudalism used to, but much, much more efficiently: by turning masses of people into capitalists.
    And this is true for the IT industry as well. And it kills knowledge and hope for change. Very few people in the tech companies I've worked for in the last 13 years can engage in a constructive talk like this, even huge banks' IT employees creating software for heavy financial products don't understand what Free Market, neoliberalism, money, debt, profit, socialism, anarchy, power system, democracy, politics, labor market, labor unions etc are. I mean, I'm being engaged in these very trivial conversations around the need for everyone to participate in elections and political processes even to the least possible extent on a daily basis at work… What are we talking about.. State-capitalist propaganda is so overarching; education and dialog is what everything lies in.
    Bottom line: I don't see how tech alone can transform capitalism into postcapitalism. But there was a great line in the book that a new type of human beings should emerge for the change to take place, with different values and more knowledge than today. That I second and to that I applaud.

  • giving everyone a basic income will only create inflation. money is just a medium of exchange for exchanging value. it is not an end in and of itself. we need to start teaching economics again in schools. i can't believe people are falling for this nonsense.

  • What if we intentionally left parts of the world underdeveloped in terms of technology so that we could sell the developed parts of the benefited technologies to the underdeveloped parts of the world? Would that be unethical, to deny creative aspects of tecnologies to them?

  • As humanity became somewhat civilized we were able to agree to use money as away of organization. When we truly become civilized then we can use more sophisticated ways of organization that unlike money don't rely on punishment or reward or fear and excitement as means of motivation.

  • It started so very promising and ending so hopeless… I mean Paul seems to fail to answer the most critical question of where the motivation for long efforts is going to come from in the world of income equality. The answer he provided sounds very esoteric and wishful to me, which means Adam Smith still wins and that is sad. We need a new method of "harnessing the beast" and not another wishful type of politics.

  • Paul Mason, the man who called in to LBC radio last week to say they should not be discussing the problem of Momentum radicals within the UK Labour party which could be running the country quite soon:
    http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/shelagh-fogarty/shelagh-fogarty-takes-aim-at-paul-mason-momentum/
    A counter narrative with explanation regarding the James O'brien 3 hour show actually discussed Carillion- the subject Mason wanted LBC to focus on:
    http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/shelagh-fogarty/shelagh-fogarty-takes-aim-at-paul-mason-momentum/

  • Very poor understanding of economics, even poorer understanding of technology. This fossil needs to realise all the economic ideas he advocates have failed.

  • Work is slavery but in a resource based economy everyone contributes and technology is used to do the things we don't need to do. More like self sustaining communities networked together sharing resources. Everyone should be able to live abundantly. Great minds can create this system.

  • there are about 1.5 to 3 billion people who don't even have electricity and even more who survive on little to nothing … All you post-capitalists can start living by example as you give "everything" you take for granted to these poor masses. Maybe let the homeless live in your homes to get a feel for this FREE utopia. Wonder how much Paul was paid for that appearance at Google.

  • Paul Mason seems to shy a way from Universal basic income by giving people the bare minimal, then on the other hand; he says there is not enough jobs in the future because of l automation. Or should i say there will be jobs of but of a satisfying nature. I am confused, what he should be arguing is there is going to be no jobs in the future which most people can do, due to robots and automation. So what are they going to do, if they have no work? how are they going to live? Of course society could create crap jobs, educated people to their maximum and give it to them. It is no good doing that IE giving a highly educated person a crap job (I am talking degree level here) ad infinitum with massive debts. However lets take a step back, people today excluding graduates are highly educated from 4 -16/18. People with minimalist education are far better off in the West than, the rest of the world where there is no education provision. So of course you can continue with the same model and get more nastier version of trump, more right wing extreme politicians or think out side the box and give people enough money to live on so they can buy the products, the machines are making. People seem to think it will cost too much money, in that there will not be enough of it to go round. This ignoring the fact jobs are being replaced by automation for one reason, it is cheaper and more efficient for the employer to do so. IT IS ALSO FAR MORE PRODUCTIVE IN MAKING "GOODS AND PROFIT. What i mean is the profit will be so huge it cannot be understate or over stated. Case in point, banks are getting rid of cashiers, why because most people get their money from ATM's or just pay electronically via online banking. Case in point two, go to your local supermarket and see how many self serving machines there are. They are growing exponentially all the time, remember each machine replaces a person, then go to your local library if its open and see the self serving machines there. Just one or two machines replaces two / four librarians. Remember to be a Librarian one needs to study for a qualification (from pre graduate to post graduate). These machines does away with the librarian but also the qualifications in the future. All this has happened in the last 20 years. I remember in the early 90s if i wanted to speak to someone in the US or any where in the world. I had to do three things: One get on a plane and visit them, write a letter to them or use the telephone. All three are expensive by today's standards. Mason seems to be wedded to the world of work on the one hand ,then not on the other. Taxes do not pay for the state services the state does.

Leave a Reply