What is accelerationism?

[Anonymous No.13658625]

It seems that Marx was wrong and there's been no revolution of the proletariats and there probably never will be, but I like this Accelerationism thing I've been hearing about on /lit/. l/accelerationism, r/accelerationism, u/accelerationism and other flavours, and the various eventual outcomes that predicted like the collapse of capitalism or some perfect version of it, some AI god or something fantastical outcome. (Resulting in the end of the world doesn't sound too bad either.)

What good books are there on this? For dummies?

[Anonymous No.13658633]

Is there a list for whatever x/acc means for a given x?

[Anonymous No.13658691]

Read Meltdown it's the key document for modern accelerationism. If you like it then move on to the rest of Fanged Noumena.

[Anonymous No.13658838]

Accelerationism is the belief that the people on top are just virtue signaling and if they get what they ostensibly want they'll have to change their opinions.
For example, trying to prevent gay marriage was conservatism, trying to force drag queen story hour into rich people's town libraries, and gender affirming medical intervention into rich people's elementary schools, is accelerationism.
The problem is that the rich aren't a coheseive group, and love nothing more than seeing each other ruined.

[Anonymous No.13658843]

>>13658838
wut

[Anonymous No.13658873]

Accelerationism at it's core is just cope. People in shitty situations want to change quickly, since they believe that anything is better than what is current. It is somewhat opposed to conservatism, as conservative are trying to slow change because they like the current. It's important to remember that conservative in this context is not equivalent to the right, a left leaning state trying to slow right wing movements would also be conservative

[Anonymous No.13658874]

>>13658838
...that's accelerationism? I thought that was idpol stuff?

[Anonymous No.13658912]

Capitalism was generated/motivated/started by a Lovecraftian entity from 'outside' our perceptible bounds and it seeks to constantly self-improve, self-replicate and expand itself. Capitalism and artificial intelligence are so close to the same thing that the distinctions between them are negligible. It's a system that, given what already exists, creates itself regardless of our opinions of it. We'll be cheering it on the whole way and have been since we invented the wheel. Capital is sentient.

[Anonymous No.13658926]

>>13658838
Acceleration has two broad categories. One is the vulgar "worse is better" Marxist or right wing shooter attitude. The other is Nick Land's terminal cybernetic capital.

>>13658873
The "worse is better" drive is based on the idea that if conditions get bad quickly there will be a revolution. It's a tactic not an ideology. Land's capital acceleration isn't something anyone normal wants. Everything in his writing is a prediction of the end of the human security system (our morals and desires).

[Anonymous No.13658954]

>>13658625
Literally the last gasps of a dying ideology.

[Anonymous No.13658971]

>>13658625
accelerationism is controlled opposition. how dumb do you have to be to think that the west will just collapse into total anarchy and we'll all become cave niggers again? its already effectively collapsed as much as it could and we're living in the post-apocalyptic world right now. if you look at the societal structures and culture of the west pre-20th century, there isn't even question. slowly but surely, in the past 75-ish years, we've lost the freedoms that have come along with this anarchy, and the comforts provided by those behind it. the noose ever tightens around our necks as we stand atop the gallows which we've built for ourselves at the behest of satan, and the only thing we will be accelerating towards is our own destruction. accelerationism is just turbo-progressivism for suicidal right wing maniacs. spengler predicted this.

[Anonymous No.13658981]

>>13658625
>What good books are there on this?

Das Kapital volumes 1-3
The first chapter of the Communist Manifesto

[Anonymous No.13659142]

>>13658912
there's a reason people talk about Michael Anissimov, Nick Land, and Julius Evola, and only in hushed whispers about Carlyle, Moldbug, and Jim

[Anonymous No.13659145]

>>13658981
this

[Anonymous No.13659208]

>>13658981
>>13659145
Cope. Capitalism will never collapse or stop. There is no off switch.

[Anonymous No.13659230]

>>13658912
Capital only exists as a relational term between beings. It needs persons to exist to be an economic relation to and from. If capital kills off man then it has no way to exist as a relation between men.

Does Land address how and why acc hypostatises capital from a relation into a kind of personhood?

[Anonymous No.13659471]

>>13659230
Land and Anissimov started out as technological singularity cultists and never stopped being singularity cultists. The entire singularity cult programme is to ignore the real issues and repeat platitudes and feelgood slogans to each other.

[Anonymous No.13659744]

>>13658838
wat

[Anonymous No.13659763]

>>13658625
Speed shitposting.
The quantification of low-quality shitposts from pseuds who can't meme.

[Anonymous No.13659768]

>>13658873
This

[Anonymous No.13659771]

reducing accelerationism to politics (speed up x to do y) is missing literally the whole point. there is a quick introduction on youtube that will explain it better than anyone on /lit/

[Anonymous No.13659825]

>>13659230
I suppose it would have to be the relation between the thinking machine and the last imperative given to it by men, right?

[Anonymous No.13659830]

>>13658625
It's an attitude towards systems derived by evolutionary biology. When you detect the tendency to propagate errors in certain functions within a system, it is desirable to "accelerate" the dependency and use of those functions so that the errors will propagate faster and in greater abundance, because the process of becoming overpopulated with errors and reaching critical failure is the only means by which a system resists entropy and evolves to handle a greater payload, and all systems WILL evolve.

[Anonymous No.13659847]

So now that OP's request has been fulfilled, lets talk about why we love Nick Land.
I think that Nick Land is the only philosopher for people who, like me, are a radical misanthropist. Nick Land wants to eradicate humanity, and so do I. 95 % of people I've come to meet online or from the media or real life are either absolutes assholes and I get the urge to physicall hurt them, or they are vapid, uninteresting degenerates. Even on /lit/ I'd likely hate most people.
Who gives me the moral and philosophical permission to have this thoughts which would be considered "evil" in christianity? None better than Nick Land.

[Anonymous No.13659859]

>>13659847
If Nick Land hates idiots so much, why does he love them so much?

[Anonymous No.13659863]

>>13658625

[Anonymous No.13659885]

>>13659230
>Capital only exists as a relational term between beings
okay, follow you
>It needs persons to exist
now you lost me. why does it need people? if everyone died tomorrow the stock market would still work, we have bots running it. is the stock market no longer the stock market without humans? those stocks are still being bought and sold for real money regardless if whether we are there or not to recognize it, the material realities of it are the same. scale this up. we are automating as much as we can, soon trucks will drive without humans, fast food places will serve you without humans, asteroids will be mined without humans. So long as these automated systems work, who cares about humans? Land thinks capitalism is a tendency towards efficiency more than anything, to boil it down to one person trading with another person is to miss the lovecraftian outside

[Anonymous No.13659889]

>>13659863
this is a meme about liberals though

[Anonymous No.13660016]

>>13659889
Which accelerationists are the pure form of.

[Anonymous No.13660026]

>>13659230
z/acc

[Anonymous No.13660037]

the blockchain will never end, capital will never be completed

[Anonymous No.13660048]

>>13660037
Cringe.

[Anonymous No.13660051]

Imagine being a neolib larping as a neomarxist while pretending to be as important as Marx.

[Anonymous No.13660057]

>>13658625
I think you mean
>What isn't accelerationism

t. acc/acc

[Anonymous No.13660065]

>>13660016
how did Marx invent pure liberalism? are you on crack

[Anonymous No.13660072]

>>13659847
You might like Ulrich Horstmann, another "anthropofugal" thinker.
>"The final aim of history is a crumbling field of ruins. It's final meaning is the sand blown through the eye-holes of human skulls."
>"[History]...the place of a skull and charnel house of a mad, incurably bloodthirsty slaughtering, flaying and whetting, of an irresistible urge to destroy to the last.”
>"The true Garden of Eden is desolation."
Read The Apocalypse in Germany (or Das Untier if you're German). He can lean a little hard on the edgy factor sometimes, but he's probably in line with what you're looking for.

[Anonymous No.13660073]

>>13660048
unironically it would be great for bitcoin as a whole for China to ban mining, it would help secure the network and reduce market manipulation

[Anonymous No.13660084]

>>13658625
>it appears marx was wrong
Incorrect. Marx saw the downfall of Capitalism as comming directly from the falling level of profit. In other words the net profit from all industries will gradually fall over time due to the increasing reliance on capital intensity. This is historically true and will continue to be a reality. You can literally look at graphs that chart it.

There are a few things that can slow it down though and that is mainly outsourcing jobs to places where you can pay people nothing and not rely on capital-intensity as much. Eventually the profit rate will continue to fall as the capitalists run out of impoverished people to exploit.

[Anonymous No.13660088]

>>13660057
t. Mark Fisher's ghost

[Anonymous No.13660963]

>>13660084
How long left then? HMMMMM?

[Anonymous No.13660974]

>>13658625
this is my favorite gif

[Anonymous No.13661050]

girardfag or anyone else who knows what I'm talking about just link the warosu posts where girardfag posts his accelerationism reading list.

[Anonymous No.13661279]

What did he mean by this?

[Anonymous No.13661352]

>>13661279
Who the fuck are these people? What is it with zoomers quoting random people, especially dog fuckers with anime/furry profile images?

[Anonymous No.13661358]

>>13661352
Outsideness is Land's twitter account

[Anonymous No.13661574]

>>13660065
Marx is an accelerationist? What kind of speed are you on, retard?

[Anonymous No.13661582]

>>13660073
>everything is good news
>Buy The Dip
>Trust the Plan
>capitalism can never fail

[Anonymous No.13661592]

>>13661574
>the free trade system is destructive. It breaks up old nationalities and pushes the antagonism of the proletariat and the bourgeoisie to the extreme point. In a word, the free trade system hastens the social revolution. It is in this revolutionary sense alone, gentlemen, that I vote in favor of free trade.
t. Karl "not an accelerationist" Marx

[Anonymous No.13662630]

>>13661050
>>/lit/thread/S12056787

have some chiptune to go with
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nf29ShkoAiA

[Anonymous No.13662897]

>>13659825
>>13659885
But capital only exists as capital when it functions as a tool for a person to multiply their labour output.

The stockmarket bot is owned by someone to perform his labour task more efficiently, the same as a farm owner owing or hiring extra labour to cut down his crop fields at harvest time.

Capital exists as a tool (give all the farmers hand scythes so they cut crops faster, or give the bots faster CPUs etc.) for a person.

If there were a runaway process of capital production in those examples given, then the end result wouldn't be accelerationism, it would be stockpiling of excess and unsellable goods, the farm crops would languish in storage silos after the sell market was saturated, the extra trading bot servers would run idle because they have no tasks that are not being performed by other servers, because the goods are not economic agents themselves but tools *for* economic agents and mediators between agents.

Acc seems to equivocate and blur this distinction and turn capital into an economic agent itself. The problem is for what end? Capital acts as a tool and mediator for economic agents to perform their ends. Saying capital is a mystery Lovecraft horror could be handwaving to evade the problem of how capital transforms into an economic agent itself, into a being/person(s), rather than just a tool and mediator of and between agents.

How does a plough, one of the first tools humans invented, become a farmer? How does the instrumental cause (capital) become the efficient cause (person)?

[Anonymous No.13662909]

Land is a bored Satanist who just wants to see the tech singularity or, failing that, literally any other revolution before he dies. In case it doesn't happen he'll settle for watching his acolytes trigger the libtards and milder incursions from the Outside such as the Trump election. It's all for his own personal amusement.

[Anonymous No.13662929]

>>13661352
Steve Sailor is a Republican strategist who has long advocated for a White identity focused campaign and ideological purpose to win US elections:
>GOP Future Depends on Winning Larger Share of the White Vote - 11/28/2000
https://vdare.com/articles/gop-future-depends-on-winning-larger-share-of-the-white-vote

[Anonymous No.13662997]

>>13662897
>How does the instrumental cause (capital) become the efficient cause (person)?
I suppose an answer could be that the instrumental cause (capital) destroys old efficient causes (people) and creates it's own new efficient causes (AI, human slaves etc.)

In this sense capital remains an instrument/tool of efficient causes, but it also their master and creator. Back to the farmer example, the supposed instrument of mechanized farm machinery actually destroyed all the plough farmers and recreated them as tractor drivers on consolidated factory farms. Even if capital is just an instrument, it's godlike, with the power to make and destroy efficient causes.

The industrial looms destroyed the artisans. The AI destroys the humans. The instrumental cause is the master of efficient cause slaves.

[Anonymous No.13663113]

>>13658874
progressivism is the manifested will of capital

[Anonymous No.13663186]

>>13661582
>Chinese mining centralization? 51% attacks? Sorry, I only know what memes mean.

[Anonymous No.13663195]

>>13662897
It's called AI anon, welcome to the 21st century

[Anonymous No.13664118]

>>13658625
the friends we've made along the way

[Anonymous No.13664145]

>>13658625
>It seems that Marx was wrong
It's still too early to make that call.

[Anonymous No.13664151]

>>13663195
AI is a tool of a human owner. In what way is commissioning AI different to hiring a human labourer? The employees of a business don't necessarily (or even commonly) accelerate an enterprise out of the control of the business owner, why is AI different? How does an instrumental cause become an efficient cause?

[Anonymous No.13664166]

>>13662909
He was simply so pissed off at society telling him he couldn't fuck his sister that he turned to the dark side.

[Anonymous No.13664180]

>>13664145
>It's still too early to make that call.
Holy fucking kekers, how many more failed attempts will it take to convince you retarded commies that it's never going to happen?

[Anonymous No.13664233]

Capitalism and Western culture are inseparable just like slavery and the Roman economy were inseparable; it will exist as long as Western culture exists.

[Anonymous No.13664238]

>>13664233
What happens when Neo-China arrives from the future?

[Anonymous No.13664241]

>>13664166
>fuck his sistet
What now?

[Anonymous No.13664247]

>>13659885
This almost sounds like a Stanislav Lem story.

[Anonymous No.13664252]

>>13664233
Exactly why we need a long march through the institutions to erode it from the inside.

[Anonymous No.13664261]

>>13664151
Human intelligence exists for the purpose of reproducing faster. Somehow we've redirected it toward other goals often against our original purpose. General intelligence seeks the fundamental purposes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrumental_convergence

[Anonymous No.13664266]

>>13664241
Read "A Dirty Joke" by Land. The whole idea is about how global capitalism is the reason he'll never be able to fuck his sister again, unless we #accelerate and he so far-outward atomizes that he ends up re-intersecting her at some instant of infinite oneness, I think? So we need to drink more red bull so Nick Land can fuck his sister again.

[Anonymous No.13664285]

>>13658873

At it's core it's a kind of millennialism and the idea that you can speed up the second coming of Christ (or whatever the Islamic equivalent is called). What infuriates me with accellerationists is they can never point to an example of their policy working, and it ends up relying on an idealistic expectation that things will unfold to their profit if they make things worse for themselves in the short run. The way I've stylized it is that it's akin to someone who is anti-communist in 1918 Germany deciding the best way to beat the Spartakists and communists is to vote for them and support their struggle because once they get in power they will fuck up and turn the people against them. That's how demented it is. It reminded me of pic related and it infuriated me reading about how truly religiously deluded the marxists were and in turn how deluded the natsoc/white nationalists are now. It's having perfect be the enemy of good and believing in intentionally suffering and disadvantaging yourself and your charge in the present to make things better in the future. Because like millennialists, they know their future will come to be and how it will unfold. Still waiting on that global proletariat revolution, bub. It's 3rd place behind the philosopher king and Jesus' second coming in the historical contest of hide and seek.

We've also seen accellerationism attempted in the world with Al-Qaeda's "Management of Savagery" - a doctrine to intentionally cultivate unrest and disorder so that you and your system can sweep into the chaos that unfolds and provide security. At fucking least that intends to weaken your opposition rather than gleefully empower them (white supremacist accellerationists) or idly stand by and do nothing but wait for it to reach a boil and hope things break in your favor. Hope hope Hope. Since marxism can't supply food it has to rely on supplying hope. What a dope.

That being said at least some commies have braincells like >>13664252 since the long march through the institutions is a very very sound strategy.

[Anonymous No.13664318]

>>13663186
KYS

[Anonymous No.13664342]

>why, yes, i do in fact believe in technocapital subsumption of everything human, how did you know
Who do you picture?

[Anonymous No.13664346]

>>13664342
>Who do you picture?
See pic related

[Anonymous No.13664371]

>>13664285
>since the long march through the institutions is a very very sound strategy.
How are you going to do that if everyone is watching Love Island and glued to their smartphones?

[Anonymous No.13664376]

>>13664346
>Frequently bought together
Photoshop right?

[Anonymous No.13664387]

>>13664261
Ty

[Anonymous No.13664396]

>>13664376
i wish

[Anonymous No.13664419]

>>13662897
>agents
You seem to give humans special place. Why? What makes us special? Only thing I can think of is ability of self-reproduction, but good managers of capital effectively give it ability of self-production too.

[Anonymous No.13664483]

>>13664261
Is it required reading?

[Anonymous No.13664497]

>>13664261
>Human intelligence exists for the purpose of reproducing faster.
I would argue it is not about reproducing faster but increasing the survival rates of offspring.

[Anonymous No.13664501]

>>13664419
How does the plough become a farmer though? There's clearly some steps needed to go from mere capital to being an economic agent, to go from instrument to efficient cause. The plough itself isn't an estate manager.

[Anonymous No.13664522]

>>13664501
>How does the plough become a farmer though?
IIRC there are already experiments with autonomous farming.
>There's clearly some steps needed to go from mere capital to being an economic agent, to go from instrument to efficient cause
In order to find an answer to this question, I believe we must ask first what makes the bags of flesh we are the economic agents of today. As I said, I belive it's the ability of self-reproduction which includes both the ability to make babies through benising vaganas and our primal drive towards putting benis in vagana.

[Anonymous No.13664564]

>>13664522
An agent could be: decision making + inherent/axiomatic drives, one drive being persistence through time (with sexual reproduction being one solution).

>autonomous farming
That's not the point though. Farms are often owned by absentee landlords who employ or sub-lease to managers and serfs. Agency means going beyond being an instrumental cause and becoming an efficient cause of the enterprise. If AI is akin to labour then it would be the employed estate manager buying his own farm that competes with his old employers, with an implication that the AI-owned farm will outcompete his old human masters because he has superhuman intelligence and other attributes.

[Anonymous No.13664577]

>>13664261
>Human intelligence exists for the purpose of reproducing faster
Not really. Intelligence ensures survival and therefore chances of reproducing. The least "intelligent" parts of our brain are those engineered towards reproduction.

[Anonymous No.13664605]

>>13658625
There was no revolution of the proletariat. Instead, the proletariat was lifted up into a lifestyle if unprecedented luxury and comfort, a way of life which dabs on the lives of kings and queens alive at the time of Marx, all thanks to the activity of the free market. Many people are extremely ungrateful for this, have no idea what they have, and for whom no level life quality will EVER be enough as long as other people have more than them. You can safely ignore any 'accelerationists' along with all other anti-capitalists and associated morons.

[Anonymous No.13664622]

>>13664497
>>13664577
Reproducing faster in aggregate. Keeping yourself alive and keeping your children alive both improve your total number of children. It's basic evolution and it's the source of all your traits.

[Anonymous No.13664640]

>>13664564
>An agent could be: decision making + inherent/axiomatic drives
Decision making part could be solved through AI easily. Setting up the irrational is the problematic part.
>That's not the point though.
Well, it's plough that checked all the relevant boxes of what constitutes a farmer withing the framework of economy. The boxes are production of agricultural commodities.
>Agency means going beyond being an instrumental cause and becoming an efficient cause of the enterprise.
Precisely, there needs to be infinite goal-onto-itself, just like we have our emotions that drive us to do shit. If us fleshies were merely rational agents, we would be motionless.

[Anonymous No.13664696]

>>13664605
>the proletariat was lifted up into a lifestyle if unprecedented luxury and comfort
Yea, and it's going to the shitter thanks to neoliberalism. Don't mistake all the luxury and comfort for commodities. There are other aspects like "How long do I have to work?", "Will I be able to afford the socially acceptable lifestyle?", "How much is my privacy invaded because of work?", "Is the economy stable enough to start a family?", "How demanding is the work?", "How much are my cognitive abilities affected through marketting?", "How much of wealth is funneled to the owning class?", "How much debt do I have?".

That doesn't even tackle the development of 3rd world and globalization, which is already causing instability to west.

[Anonymous No.13664730]

>been 100+ years of "late stage capitalism" but the worldwide revolution and commie utopia will come any day now

[Anonymous No.13664741]

>>13664640
>Setting up the irrational is the problematic part.
I think that part would be easy. Just give it a list of drives, they needn't be human. The Bostrom wiki page linked above(>>13664261) had an example of a paperclip building AI that wants to make paperclips as a satisfactory demonstration of an AI that becomes a runaway leviathan thanks to instrumental convergence: it acquires the instruments it needs incidentally and consumes all the worlds resources to fulfil its simple axiomatic drive programmed into it.

Persistence through time would be the simplest drive that motivates an accelerating AI, and a drive you could reduce all life to.

>the farmer
The problem is an equivocation between labour and entrepreneur or owner. AI can replace labour, and this is a natural extension of industrialisation replacing artisans with machines. Labour here is an instrument for the process of the enterprise that has an owner.

The harder question is can AI replace the bourgeoisie, the capitalist owner of the means of production. Here is what I mean by farmer: the farm owner. It's one thing to say AI becomes the means of production i.e. the instruments of production, it's a different thing to say AI becomes the owner of the means of production i.e. the efficient cause of the instruments of production.

AI replacing workers is as trivial as a machine loom replacing hand weavers. AI replacing a factory owner as owner is a higher order thing, and on the surface a category mistake: an instrument becoming an efficient cause and agent. No machine loom bought/acquired a factory in Manchester during the Industrial Revolution.

[Anonymous No.13665164]

>>13664741
>The problem is an equivocation between labour and entrepreneur or owner.
Owner is merely a parasite on the economical process is typical in this era. The crucial parts is the production and the consumption.
>The harder question is can AI replace the bourgeoisie, the capitalist owner of the means of production.
Certainly. Historically we had examples when even our squishy workers did expropriate the factory from the owner. But I don't really thing that's the crucial part. The crucial part is autonomy of the production process from humans. You can still own it, but if the thing runs on itself and any human intervention will be detrimental to the process (making it less competitive with other machine-organism) the the owner is simply superflous and machines will overthrown this aristocracy of flesh and bone not through belief in some bearded ashkenaz, but through simple materialistic optimalization through competition.

[Anonymous No.13665175]

In a nutshell: "It has to get worse before it gets better."

[Anonymous No.13665289]

>>13664285
>The way I've stylized it is that it's akin to someone who is anti-communist in 1918 Germany deciding the best way to beat the Spartakists and communists is to vote for them and support their struggle because once they get in power they will fuck up and turn the people against them.
That's horrible comparison. Spartacists weren't in power, you don't accelerate through supporting them because they haven't been set in motion yet. Acceleration would be supporting Hitler's aggression and militarism decade later, because the further is Nazi ideology let to manifests itself the more enemies it aggravates until it aggravates more enemies it could handle and collapses due to it's own nature.

[Anonymous No.13665344]

>>13665164
>Historically we had examples when even our squishy workers did expropriate the factory from the owner.
They're always shit though. They do poorly in a competitive marketplace and almost always die, suggesting the privileged and special role of the entrepreneur owner. Labour acts in labour interests which is not the same as the processes interest for which labour is an input-cost. The process defines the different roles of labour and owner, and their different and antagonistic interests.

There seems to be a Marxist fallacy at the heart of this that autonomy of the process from the capitalist owner will lead to AI labour taking the position of the owner, when human labour never successfully took over the role of the capitalist owner despite having the same autonomy (and when it tried it merely recreated the entrepreneur class as a less succesful nomenklatura). Having an absentee owner in an enterprise doesn't appear to lead to workers taking ownership of a business. Why would AI labour be different outside of Marxist wishful thinking?

The advantage the AI has is being able to be both labour and entrepreneur simultaneously and without conflict between the roles. A single unified identity that is a member of both classes without antagonism.

[Anonymous No.13665355]

>>13665289
In reality Hitler backpeddled after the failure of the Munich putsch and went for the slow "read my book" electoral coalition-building with other parties (DNVP) route and achieved success.

[Anonymous No.13665453]

>>13665344
>They're always shit though. They do poorly in a competitive marketplace and almost always die
I'm afraid liberal ideology is obstructing your field of vision. I'm not arguing whereever they were efficient or not, neither I have the desire to.
>suggesting the privileged and special role of the entrepreneur owner
Owner has only role, when he is also doing labour through organizing and setting quotas or prices. When I meant that owner is a parasite, I meant specifically the role of owner, which isn't entrepreneur, but merely someone who extracts wealth from the process through his social designation as "owner".
>There seems to be a Marxist fallacy at the heart of this that autonomy of the process from the capitalist owner will lead to AI labour taking the position of the owner, when human labour never successfully took over the role of the capitalist owner despite having the same autonomy
Only fallacy here is that you are trying to focus on history in attempt to make normative statements, whereas I'm talking in abstracts about what could be. The potential is that we will eventually develop machines that are better at organizing production than humans and once those machines are in place any intervention from human would be inferiour to that of a machine.
>and when it tried it merely recreated the entrepreneur class as a less succesful nomenklatura
That's very western perspective. Nomenklatura wasn't really much of a class, neither it was recreation of the capitalists. They were managers, they weren't owners.
>Having an absentee owner in an enterprise doesn't appear to lead to workers taking ownership of a business
Because there's a state enforcing the relation of ownership.
>Why would AI labour be different
Because what's the point of ownership, when you can't alter the production process? If you alter it, you end up with less efficient one and you will be outcompeted by those who don't alter it.
>The advantage the AI has is being able to be both labour and entrepreneur simultaneously and without conflict between the roles.
Because the divison is meaningless outside of human civilization.

[Anonymous No.13665595]

>>13664605
But this is what ASSfaggots actually believe. There's not enough capital for them.

[Anonymous No.13665645]

Imagine The Matrix with Ready Player One and you got a clear blueprint for the future.

[Anonymous No.13665687]

>>13665645
>Dude, let's keep humans alive because we need them for plot reasons
No.

[Anonymous No.13665742]

>>13665687
Do not read stories and narratives in a 1:1 ratio in relation with reality anon. All stories are based on natural language, which is a symbolic system. The only model that can sustain a 1:1 relationship is set theory and even this one has seems to have problems of its own. Map is not territory. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_paradox

[Anonymous No.13665753]

ASS

[Anonymous No.13665964]

Yep, this is all going in my g/acc compilation.