In any scam, any con, any hustle, the big winners are the people who supply the scammers - not the scammers themselves. The kids selling dope on the corner are making less than minimum wage, while the respectable crime-bosses who own the labs clean up. Desperate “retail investors” who buy shitcoins from Superbowl ads get skinned, while the MBA bros who issue the coins make millions (in real dollars, not crypto).
1/
This is absolutely classic passive-income brainworms thinking. “I have a bot that can turn out plausible sentences. I will locate places where sentences can be exchanged for money, aim my bot at it, sit back, and count my winnings.” It’s #MBA logic on meth: find a thing people pay for, then, without bothering to understand why they pay for that thing, find a way to generate something like it at scale and bombard them with it.
21/
@pluralistic@mamot.fr
Well, if your bombs are cheap enough to produce and deploy, why not, carpet bomb the internet with a billion of them, and if you get a dollar for only 1/100000th of them, that’s $10000 for you.
And if manage to make the $1 to be recurring monthly, …
That was always the economy of SPAM. The handful of idiots per million emails sent who bought penis enlargement products. So we ended up with SMTP being so ugly that half a dozen big silos provide 99+% of email today.
Con artists start by conning themselves, with the idea that “you can’t con an honest man.” But the factor that predicts whether someone is connable isn’t their honesty - it’s their desperation. The kid selling drugs on the corner, the mom desperately DMing her high-school friends to sell them leggings, the cousin who insists that you get in on their shitcoin - they’re all doing it because the system is rigged against them, and getting worse every day.
22/
These people reason - correctly - that all the people getting really rich are scamming. If Amazon can make $38b/year selling “ads” that push worse products that cost more to the top of their search results, why should the mere fact that an “opportunity” is obviously predatory and fraudulent disqualify it?
https://pluralistic.net/2023/11/29/aethelred-the-unready/#not-one-penny-for-tribute
23/
The quest for passive income is really the quest for a “greater fool,” the economist’s term for the person who relieves you of the useless crap you just overpaid for. It rots the mind, atomizes communities, shatters solidarity and breeds cynicism:
https://pluralistic.net/2023/02/24/passive-income/#swiss-cheese-security
The rise and rise of #botshit cannot be separated from this phenomenon.
24/
The botshit in our search-results, our social media feeds, and our in-boxes isn’t making money for the enshittifiers who send it - rather, they are being hustled by someone who’s selling them the “picks and shovels” for the AI gold rush:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/jan/03/botshit-generative-ai-imminent-threat-democracy
25/
That’s the true cost of all the automation-driven unemployment #CritiHype: while we’re nowhere near a place where bots can steal your job, we’re certainly at the point where your boss can be suckered into firing you and replacing you with a bot that fails at doing your job:
https://pluralistic.net/2024/01/11/robots-stole-my-jerb/#computer-says-no
26/
The manic “entrepreneurs” who’ve been stampeded into panic by the (correct) perception that the economy is a game of musical chairs where the number of chairs is decreasing at breakneck speed are easy marks for the Leland Stanfords of AI, who are creating generational wealth for themselves by promising that their bots will automate away all the tedious work that goes into creating value.
27/
Expect a lot more Amazon Marketplace products called “I’m sorry, I cannot fulfil this request as it goes against OpenAI use policy”:
https://www.theverge.com/2024/1/12/24036156/openai-policy-amazon-ai-listings
No one’s going to buy these products, but the AI picks-and-shovels people will still reap a fortune from the attempt. And because history repeats itself, these newly minted billionaires are continuing Leland Stanford’s love affair with eugenics:
https://www.truthdig.com/dig-series/eugenics/
28/
The fact that AI spam doesn’t pay is important to the fortunes of AI companies. Most high-value AI applications are very risk-intolerant (self-driving cars, radiology analysis, etc). An AI tool might help a human perform these tasks more accurately - by warning them of things that they’ve missed - but that’s not how AI will turn a profit. There’s no market for AI that makes your workers cost more but makes them better at their jobs:
https://locusmag.com/2023/12/commentary-cory-doctorow-what-kind-of-bubble-is-ai/
29/