Artificial Intelligence? No! Machines Should Remain Our Stupid Slaves.

Artificial Intelligence? Nah! Machines Should Remain Our Stupid Slaves.

The times are always changing.
We humans used to walk and ride on animals a lot more.
Now people tend to drive a lot more, and those of us who don’t — like myself — are usually seen as odd.  While I don’t advocate dependence on machines, I’m also open to technology’s positive potential, such as machines doing more work for people, and people in general being more genuinely comfortable with life as a result.
The problem, as usual, is that people are lagging behind. Technology often is used just to screw people’s lives up more, as opposed to make them better. Some things people are very slow to change on. According to, only 47 percent of California voters “strongly support” a California $15 minimum wage. But not only do I think there should be a temporary wage increase, but I think the system of wage labor should eventually be scrapped (then, obviously, a wage increase would ne unnecessary).

Let me elaborate here , and I’ll bring technology and AI back into it later: (don’t worry)
Despite what conservatives and most liberals tell you, wage labor is exploitative by its very nature.  Most people only work for the money, and many of those people simply take whatever work they can get.  Because they’re dumb? No. Precisely because they’re relatively smart. They know dream jobs are often just that — the stuff of dreams. Many take what they can get and try to be happy with it. The problem is, this aspect of being smart leads to stupid consequences, and it’s not without reason. People also work because they are legally compelled to have money to pay for everything, as the resources, goods, services and decision making have substantially been “privatized” around the world. As a result, people work jobs they hate, and often end up disliking life, themselves, and other people as a result. Many are alienated, have little power over their lives, and know everything they have can quickly be taken away, just by a little economic downturn.
Example: Fall behind on covering the automatic student loan withdrawals from your bank account? That’s too bad. Now here’s a $34 fee on top of the amount withdrawn. Have a nice day!   You’re supposed to just shrug your shoulders and say, “Oh well. I was a little short this month.”

till, even if you play nice you’ll be regarded as an “irresponsible” deadbeat for falling behind, and idiots like FOX News will trash talk you for not being very well off. Yet, almost incredibly, people no richer than yourself will eat it up (Yum!). They’ll consider your lack of cash a sign of bad spending habits, even though you may not have much say in how much money your paid, or even on what you can spend it on. You don’t even have much choice to say “No” to money in general, unless you want to live in a shack, Ted Kaczynski style. Not everyone’s disappointed in how things are, but no sane and reasonable person thinks this system is flawless.  It treats people like machines — disposable machines.
And disproportionate economic advantage is drawn from people’s labor by corporations.

But what if, as some suggest, we could rely on actual machines to do more work for us?
Could so-called “artificial intelligence” be the key?
A Coke machine doesn’t seem to think, have emotions, feel pain if it’s dropped.
It doesn’t need to worry about making enough to feed its kids.
And the same with would be true of other electronics, unless something drastic happens and humans can create genuine emotions and thought for machines.
Personally, I don’t see any good reason to do so.
Perhaps we should just try to create machines that can do many of the tasks that people do,
and finally use it as a reason to relax more and not focus on making money so much.
Why worry when we don’t have to? Did we ever need to in the first place, or is most of it
just culturally conditioned bullshit?

Most of what I’m saying is due to empathy. I have some empathy left, and I hate to see people wasting their time at jobs they hate, just to get a little cash to barely make ends meet. Then, of course, there are those rendered superfluous by the system, who are either unemployed, underemployed, or literally dying.
Meanwhile, people like FOX’s John Stossel (or the Stoss-hole) say Americans only pretend to be homeless, that it’s not a real problem. However, I know better. I’m not a machine that accepts whatever a blinking box tells me.  On top of that, I know we have a global economy, which means Americans aren’t the only people in question.  If Americans are pretending to be homeless, what about everyone else in the world on the streets?
Are they all faking it, too?

In contrast to my empathy, flies do not exhibit emotions, though they have a sense of “fight or flight.” Other things, like protozoan flagella, most certainly exhibit life, but aren’t likely to go “Aww” when they see a puppy.
We aren’t supposed to feel empathy toward the homeless, or even those doing a little better but still struggling.  In fact, some think we’re supposed to just accept things as they are. Deal with it!  But I do deal with it, and I think it’s time for a better deal.  If one doesn’t exist yet, we need to make one.

In many ways, people have already been regarded as living machines.
There have been efforts to “program” people mentally, and in a purely clinical, scientific way. Some of it is with behavior research (like if someone has brain damage and doctors are experimenting), and some of it is just indoctrination. The military is well-known for its “behavior modification techniques,” and, frankly, it’s one of the main reasons I haven’t joined military service. Similarly, advertising is all about changing the way we think about products, and making us believe this brand or that represents America. Conveniences become necessities, and if you question the new necessities, you are treated as a goofball, or even dangerous. However, we should question the world around us like this, I think, because that’s what brains are for. They’re not just acceptance devices. Maybe you don’t agree with everything I’ve typed here, but you should at least be capable of thinking similarly. Nothing I’ve said is particularly outrageous. Truly. They are simple, accurate generalizations, based on my actual life experience. And others have surely had similar, relatable experiences.

Personally, I don’t even want it to be considered philosophy, rather almost casual observations about how the world actually looks. Why? Because philosophy always reduces itself to absurdism, because humans are involved. We turn everything into a category, and assign stereotypes to that category. We project these stereotypes onto everyone we believe fits these categories, and all hell breaks loose. Racism is an obvious example, but it needn’t be so specific. For example, one can hear countless references to “Western” materialism or “Eastern” existentialism, though The West has had many existentialists. But why think in terms of East and West at all? Also, shouldn’t philosophy be greater than philosophers? I don’t need to consult Plato or Aristotle on everything. Why should I artificially make them all that relevant to my life? This isn’t even about critiquing these philosophers. It’s just about questioning their relevance to my own life, because I have a brain that functions on some level. I don’t need a machine that can do this for me, even if it does it better than me.

Can we make robots that are fully alive?
A lot of this is about opinion, I’m afraid, and opinions are influenced by culture. Example: If 99.9% of the population believes nakedness in front of the opposite sex is inherently sexual, then it is. However, the average nudist colony doesn’t seem to consider itself purely sexual. So much is rooted in culture, our beliefs, our thoughts. The same could be said of what is alive and what is not. My personal feeling is that we shouldn’t make machines that are similar to life, but that solely “think” to the extent that they can work — which is what corporations do with sweatshop workers anyway. We shouldn’t bother assigning machines true life, but “artificial life,” as the very term suggests, and a “life” limited to menial labor and not having feelings about it.  Machines are better suited for that “life” than we are.I’d like to say that a true living, thinking machine is only so much mysticism, with a high-tech twist. Maybe I’m wrong about that, who knows? Either way, I’d rather have robots do my laundry and pave our roads, and leave the living to us.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s