The Luddites weren’t anti-technology—they opposed machines that destroyed their livelihoods and benefited factory owners at workers’ expense. Their resistance was a critique of the social and economic chaos caused by the Industrial Revolution. Over time, “Luddite” became an insult due to capitalist propaganda, dismissing their valid concerns about inequality and exploitation. Seen in context, they were early critics of unchecked capitalism and harmful technological change—issues still relevant today.

  • spujb@lemmy.cafeOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    Yeah. I upvoted WoodScientist because they are technically right. But in a real economy? There isn’t a significant enough of a demand for human creativity and so it plays out completely opposed to what they were saying.

    • CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Which makes me worried because our current type of AI can’t innovate, sure some future one could but it would be a completely different system and at present most companies seem content to simply throw ever more computing power into training our current fundementally flawed method. In the meantime Art may end up stagnating as human artists are driven out of commercial spaces and hobbyist artists are increasingly worried about getting scraped.