reinventing Gosplan
Time for some horseshoe theory. Right-wing
surveillance oligarchy has looped all the way back around to
left-wing
central economic planning.
Cory Doctorow sums up some recent news from Meta, in Pluralistic:
Mark Zuckerberg announces mind-control ray (again). Zuck has
finally described how he’s going to turn AI’s terrible economics around:
he’s going to ask AI to design his advertisers’ campaigns, and these
will be so devastatingly effective that advertisers will pay a huge
premium to advertise on Meta.
Or, as Nilay Patel at The Verge put it, Mark
Zuckerberg just declared war on the entire advertising industry.
What Mark is describing here is a vision where a client comes to Meta
and says
I want customers for my product,
and Meta does
everything else. It generates photos and videos of those products using
AI, writes copy about those products with AI, assembles that into an
infinite number of ads with AI, targets those ads to all the people on
its platforms with AI, measures which ads perform best and iterates on
them with AI, and then has those customers buy the actual products on
its platforms using its systems.
But the mind-control ray story, if true, would affect more companies,
and functions within companies, than just advertising. Myles Younger
writes, Zuck
Says AI Will Make Advertising So Good Its Share of GDP Will Grow. Is
That Really Possible? In the Meta version of the future, somehow the
advertising
share of the economy grows to include media, sales,
and customer service. And a business that wants to sell a product or
service would be able to change the number of units sold with one
setting—the amount of money sent to Meta. That means the marketing
department within the business can also be dramatically reduced. Or do
you even need a marketing department when the one decision it has to
make is how much money to send to Meta to move how many units? That
could be handled as part of some other job.
TheZvi, in Zuckerberg’s Dystopian AI Vision, writes,
When asked what he wants to use AI for, Zuckerberg’s primary answer is advertising, in particular an
ultimate black boxwhere you ask for a business outcome and the AI does what it takes to make that outcome happen. I leave all thedo not wantandmisalignment maximalist goal out of what you are literally calling a black box, film at 11 if you need to watch it againandgeneral dystopian nightmaredetails as an exercise to the reader.
Such rightsizing, much futuristic! But wait a minute, this has been done. Centrally planned economies are already a thing, and have had well-known challenges for a while. On paper, the central planers decide up front how much of each product or service will be produced and consumed, but in reality the system ends up with everyone faking their numbers and participants ending up generally worse-off than they would have in a market that’s kept fair and honest by norms and laws, but where decisions get made bottom-up. For surveillance capitalism, that’s already happening. A majority of US teens have lost trust in Big Tech, and advertisers are starting to walk away from platforms’ AI solutions that once promised them everything. The top-down AI-driven social media story is less of a nightmare and more just more slop. More: the coming de-enshittification boom
Bonus links
Even
a Broken Clock Can Lower Drug Prices by Joan Westenberg. The CBO
has repeatedly found that negotiated drug pricing—including
international benchmarking—can save significant amounts of public
money.
Crypto
Is Still for Criming by Paul Krugman. (Will cryptocurrencies go
mainstream, or will they be stuck as just a crime thing? Turns out the
answer is both
because crime is going
mainstream.)
The AI Slop
Presidency by Matthew Gault. (This kind of thing is a good reason to
avoid generative AI
header images in blog posts. The AI
look has become the signature style of the pro-oligarch,
pro-surveillance side. This is particularly obvious on LinkedIn. An
AI-look image tends to mean a growth hacking or pro-Big Tech post, while
pro-human-rights or pro-decentralization posters tend to use original
graphics or stock photos.)
Monopoly
Round-Up: China Is Not Why America Is Sputtering by Matt Stoller.
Simply put, modern American law is oriented towards ensuring very
high returns on capital to benefit Wall Street and hinder the ability to
make things.
(fwiw, surveillance capitalism is probably part of the
problem too. Creepy negative-sum games to move more units of existing
products have higher and more predictable ROI than product innovation
does.)
Industry
groups are not happy about the imminent demise of Energy Star by
Marianne Lavelle The nonprofit Alliance to Save Energy has estimated
that the Energy Star program costs the government about $32 million per
year, while saving families more than $40 billion in annual energy
costs.
The
Mozilla Firefox New Terms of Use Disaster: What Actually Happened?
by Youssuff Quips. It is clear is that Mozilla wants to be able to
unambiguously claim to regulators that people agreed to have their data
sold – they want that permission to be persistent, and they want it to
be modifiable in perpetuity. That changes what Firefox has been, and the
Firefox I loved is gone.
(For what it’s worth I don’t think it’s as
bad as all that. In a seemingly never-ending quest to get extra income
that’s not tied to the Google search deal, Mozilla management has done a
variety of stupid
shit but they always learn from it and move on. They’ll drop their
risky adfraud
in the browser thing too at some point. More: why privacy-enhancing
advertising technologies failed)