236
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world 14 points 4 days ago

It's just gonna be the same 8 companies passing money between each other. Kinda like the Nvidia/openAI circle jerk. Us peasants will live in company towns, and be paid in company dollars that we can spend to buy food and water, from the company. Don't worry, they'll deduct rent straight from our checks.

[-] KingGimpicus@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 days ago

I've always been kind of a Balam simp. They at least pretend to be upfront and halfway honorable. Arquebus was always too pretentious. Honestly I'd probably end up in the Dosers anyways. Drugs seems like a reasonable reaction to galaxy spanning corporate overlords.

[-] brown567@sh.itjust.works 86 points 5 days ago

A cancer doesn't plan

[-] 9point6@lemmy.world 66 points 5 days ago

We kinda have two choices:

Some flavour of socialism where people get what they need for free

Or

Turbo-rio-de-janiro style inequality where we all live in slums

Now the 2nd one is what the ultra rich want and they have a lot of power, so it's kinda on the rest of us to make the first happen instead

[-] jonesey71@lemmus.org 14 points 5 days ago

Didn't the French have an option three?

[-] FukOui@lemmy.zip 14 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

It's an uphill battle, but it's better to start early than late.

Unlike before, the rich now have private armies, lobbying groups, and mass surveillance networks while we peasants own nothing. Plus, the pot is slowly boiled.

[-] Simulation6@sopuli.xyz 6 points 4 days ago

The rich have always had private armies and spy networks. The technology may have changed, but same old same old.

[-] FukOui@lemmy.zip 4 points 4 days ago

I disagree. My opinion is that the technology did change. It just became more efficient at doing its job (killing people, surveillance, and mass propaganda).

The internet was supposed to be a gateway of information, but now it's the largest propaganda network. Free speech is censored by closed source algorithms and the entire internet infrastructure is controlled and owned by the 1%.

We are more isolated compared to before, class solidarity is almost nonexistent, and its easier to identify people now vs before due to being interconnected real time.

I can go more on and on but the tldr is that technology has made it easier and faster to crush dissent

[-] trashcroissant 6 points 5 days ago

The french fucked up cause they didn't have option 1 as the follow-up to option 3.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] yermaw@sh.itjust.works 5 points 4 days ago

Option 3 : WW3 and kill off all the poors

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca 7 points 3 days ago

who cares? that's not this year's problem let alone this quarter. this year, profits go up

It's illegal to look at next year

[-] AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world 68 points 5 days ago

The owners of other robots.

[-] RedstoneValley@sh.itjust.works 50 points 5 days ago

I have a suspicion they are focusing on short-term goals, because that is what those people usually do. For example, it's probably hard to explain who should watch all the ads and buy all the advertised products when Facebook replaces their content and interactions with bot slop. They didn't think this through. This isn't some kind of visionary 4D chess. But it does not matter to them. When wasting 80 billion on a VR project that was doomed to fail from the beginning does not matter, nothing does.

[-] 1D10@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago

I purposely "watch" ads because I think it's funny that me doing it causes company's to think they work and therefore spend more money, I cannot think of a single thing I bought because of an ad, sure some things I have learned about because of ads but if I bought the product it is because I researched the product and it fit with my expectations, most of the time I buy competitive products because my assessment process asigns negative points for ads that annoy me.

[-] WindyRebel@lemmy.world 8 points 4 days ago

What you’re describing is exactly how most ads work. It’s to inundate you with a brand so you want to search it up and likely purchase it. You never bought directly from an ad, but an ad sure as fuck worked on you.

I’m a former digital marketer. Many ads are meant for brand reach. They’re basically there to ear (mind?) worm you so you’re thinking about the brand. Digital ads can be cheap in niche markets when bidding isn’t forcing up prices due to competition for market share.

[-] 1D10@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

If buy "worked" you mean "caused me to not buy a product" then you are correct. I have no memory of ever buying a product because of an ad. In fact the ads I see are almost all for products I have no interest in. I get ads for fast food and I haven't been to any restaurant in 10 years or so. I get ads for feminine hygiene products and I am male. I get ads in Spanish that I'm certain are for great products but I will never know because I don't speak Spanish. I have even got an ad from a company that makes sand traps for off shore oil rigs.

To me ads feel like a person is trying to scam me it is the same feeling I get from door to door sales people and agresive sales people in general. The more I see an ad the less likely I am to hold positive feelings for the product.

I understand that I am nerodivergent and therefore my response to ads is atypical, but it is still my response.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] rauls5@lemmy.zip 53 points 5 days ago

The economy is already morphing to serve the needs of the upper levels of worth. Look at the trend with airlines shrinking economy sections and expanding first class and business class. Pretty much all consumer offerings are moving to the luxury tier.

[-] errer@lemmy.world 14 points 5 days ago

Vegas is a good example. Increasingly caters to the top 1%.

[-] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 11 points 4 days ago

Rich people mostly. But you can save your camp currency/scrip for a few years and buy some approved shoes or whatever at the work camp store.

[-] Insekticus@aussie.zone 41 points 5 days ago

Yeah, the "elite" aren't actually smart enough to figure that out. Elite is kind of an oxymoron.

[-] 3abas@lemmy.world 14 points 5 days ago

No one asked you to use that word to describe them, why are you perpetuating it?

They're not elite, they're just rich fuckers who attained massive riches by exploiting the workers' need for survival.

load more comments (9 replies)
[-] Thrawne@lemmy.world 30 points 5 days ago

Thats not very “shareholder value” of you. /s

[-] napkin2020@sh.itjust.works 9 points 4 days ago

This is pretty much what the empires in the world war era were asking. They found the answer and it was poor, developing countries.

[-] Agent641@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Anticapitalist badthink. Prepare the mechanical hound.

[-] iceberg314@slrpnk.net 27 points 5 days ago
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] jasoman@lemmy.world 5 points 4 days ago

Rich will give robots money to spend on them to make the feel better

[-] one_old_coder@piefed.social 20 points 5 days ago

Either we all die, or our owners will give us a few bucks to make a living (UBI style), but not enough to do more. We're fucked anyway.

[-] finallymadeanaccount@lemmy.world 16 points 5 days ago

It's okay. Elon said we'd all be rich thanks to UBI once the robots have taken over all the jobs. And Elon wouldn't lie.

/s

[-] tiredofsametab@fedia.io 5 points 4 days ago

People and land become "the stuff" and are abused and traded as they wish.

[-] timestatic@feddit.org 4 points 4 days ago

Politically the system of work in return for pay will have to change. Maybe a small amount of people may still work but most will probably get basic universal income. Thats the only politically feasible outcome

[-] OriginEnergySux@lemmy.world 17 points 5 days ago

Thats assuming that complete transition goes unchallenged. I might be misanthropic, but history has shown humans can be fark'n stubborn

[-] hellequin67@lemmy.zip 13 points 5 days ago

People should consider reading Iron Heel by Jack London. Written in 1908 it is considered a social sci-fi, reading it now it feels like he came back from the future to write it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] underscores@lemmy.zip 7 points 4 days ago

you will own nothing

[-] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

The robots won't have all the jobs. And the demand for human labor will increase.

There will always be some jobs humans can't do. It's not that there's something magical about humans and the human mind. It's just that there are certain jobs that are so complex and involve such human emotional intelligence and human interaction, that any machine that could do this instead of a person would have to be a person themselves. I might trust Commander Data to be my kid's elementary school teacher. But that's also because I would consider Commander Data to be a person. But there would also be little reason to mass produce Commanders Data to be elementary school teachers, as that would amount to little more than slavery. A mind is a mind, regardless of the substrate. Forcing a mind to work for you is a moral abomination, regardless of whether that mind is flesh or silicon.

As automation has increased over the generations, the demand for human labor has increased. The fields whose services have increased in price high above inflation are non-coincidentally those with the highest amount of unavoidable human labor. Think medicine, higher education, and home construction. Automation generates vast wealth. People who profit from highly automated industries then have more money to spend on things. There's more money in the economy to support the labor-intensive industries. But automation can't meaningfully decrease the cost of producing them. So the wealth generated in low-labor intensity industries goes towards bidding up the cost of the goods and services produced in high-labor intensive industries.

Or another way to look at it. Automation is deflationary. Whenever the production of a good or service becomes highly automated, the cost that good or service tends to go down. There's a reason the idea of a walk-in-closet would have been considered absurd to your ancestors. When people spend less money on the automated goods, they have more money to spend on the labor-intensive goods.

Or, a third perspective. A reasonable assumption is that future automation will look like past automation. Yes, automation can be disruptive on an individual level. If you're 55 and your entire career specialty is automated away, you're going to be really hurting at a personal level. You just don't have time to retrain for a new career field, and medically you may be unable to. But as a whole, people move into fields that have high need for workers. We have a higher labor force participation rate than we did 200 years ago, despite only a single-digit percentage of people needing to work in agriculture now. Wave after wave of automation has failed to result in the predicted mass employment and immiseration of the populace. And every time we're told that "this time is different," it turns out to be no different than the previous times. The people telling you that this round of automation will be completely different from all the others are the same people profiting from the current AI bubble.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 days ago
[-] Vupware@lemmy.zip 3 points 4 days ago
[-] Reygle@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

No-one will have to be worried about budgets once SkyNet takes over.

[-] Agent641@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

I'll be like the oil tanker level measuring fella in Waterworld when the MIRVs rend the sky over my city. Oh, thank god.

[-] knotRyder@lemmy.ca 7 points 5 days ago

As long as corporations make products they create value where shareholders make money to buy products

[-] village604@adultswim.fan 6 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

That's not how things work. If people have to work to buy things, then people not being able to work can't buy things and the share value drops to $0.

The only way this works is with UBI

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] Sanctus@anarchist.nexus 10 points 5 days ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Vinylraupe@lemmy.zip 3 points 4 days ago

The 🅱️obots.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 07 Apr 2026
236 points (100.0% liked)

Showerthoughts

41601 readers
680 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.

Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. No politics
    • If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
    • A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS

If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.

Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS