How can you say AI produces no value? If a janitor has a new mop that doesn't look like its from 1955 , he can do a better job maintaining the building. Spell check helps office workers work faster than typewriter workers in the 60s!
In Marx's theory, AI can pass it's own value to a process--vanishingly negligible as it is--but it does not create new value. It falls into the category of constant capital. This is the portion of capital that is incapable of expanding its value in the process of production.
Marx talks about more efficient machines in Capital. If my plant can turn around more widgets than plant b, with faster yarn spinners or whatnot... my firm gains market share.
Everyone knows America had better computers and what becomes the internet before the USSR broke up, that helped America win the cold war. The USSR could sell oil, had to import a lot of its food and have awful computers. Was a big L for that team
A lot of AI is making superfluous content, so what? I could go dig holes in the backyard and add no value to the economy. I could help install in ground pools for $ and help my states GDP with my digging gear.
The stock market is speculation and when we found out DeepSeek was doing AI calculation work with less resources , investors fled various US stocks. Marx would expect this to happen!
You have lost the thread, programmer hiring is a great example. AI makes workers more effective at producing value in the working week. One more time, I don't care about random slop on the internet thats confusing people that "AI is shit". If AI is a tool workers can use, you can advance more surplus each working week from them.
You are playing games. Nobody is looking for value particles in 19th century machine or 21st century AI. We are talking about tools working people use. It would be superfluous for c level people to ignore AI , they are using it to cut the work force.
AI doesn't produce superfluous content, but rather reduces the labor time needed for the production of use-values. The market's reaction to AI advancements has complex effects, potentially leading to a decrease in required labor and a fall in profit rates. While AI may increase productivity, it doesn't necessarily increase the production of exchange-values, raising questions about the realization of these use-values in the market. This situation complicates surplus value extraction, as the value of labor power decreases, potentially leading to formation of a surplus population. Moreover, despite the potential for automation, it is becoming increasingly clear that executives don't always implement it fully, which raises questions about the reasons behind this hesitation.
It is about machinery, value of which tends to stay higher relative to labour power despite its mounting mass. The fall in the value or cost of means of production is inclined to be way slower than the increase in the mass of MoP. LP is to stay relatively cheap for ever. That's why capitalist hesitate to go full blown automation. You would be supposed to know this if you read capital volume 4.
Before we can discuss the rate of profit, please do all of your calculation concerning this measure in the same money that was used by Marx: gold or another commodity money. To do this, simply take the inverse of the price of the commodity money (gold, silver, etc.) and set this as your fixed standard of price in calculation.
I said a gazillion things in previous comment. I will flesh it out ad seriatim.
1. Does not matter whether it is in terms of fiat or commodity. We are not dealing with the accumulation but the concentration. That is why it is the rate of profit, and of no bearing on value.
2. Who gives a flying f about the production/output in which capitalism reached its own limits? All that bourgeois is interested in is the value.
3. System continues employing superfluous labour to reach full employment, which ends up with the erosion on the total capital accumulated and advanced. That is value side of it. It continues using it to create ideological shield around itself. That is political.
3.5. State with its all employees are set to be superfluous. Not something new, rather, "arose from its own organisation".
3.75. Obdurate expansion and employment of unproductive is just for preventing capital from accoumulating and profits falling more.
4. Do you think capitalist is dumb enough not to be aware of profits falling with occ rising in tandem?
There is no workaround for him other than rolling back the system. That is a must leading to creative sublation of the system.
How can you say AI produces no value? If a janitor has a new mop that doesn't look like its from 1955 , he can do a better job maintaining the building. Spell check helps office workers work faster than typewriter workers in the 60s!
In Marx's theory, AI can pass it's own value to a process--vanishingly negligible as it is--but it does not create new value. It falls into the category of constant capital. This is the portion of capital that is incapable of expanding its value in the process of production.
Marx talks about more efficient machines in Capital. If my plant can turn around more widgets than plant b, with faster yarn spinners or whatnot... my firm gains market share.
Everyone knows America had better computers and what becomes the internet before the USSR broke up, that helped America win the cold war. The USSR could sell oil, had to import a lot of its food and have awful computers. Was a big L for that team
A lot of AI is making superfluous content, so what? I could go dig holes in the backyard and add no value to the economy. I could help install in ground pools for $ and help my states GDP with my digging gear.
The stock market is speculation and when we found out DeepSeek was doing AI calculation work with less resources , investors fled various US stocks. Marx would expect this to happen!
You have lost the thread, programmer hiring is a great example. AI makes workers more effective at producing value in the working week. One more time, I don't care about random slop on the internet thats confusing people that "AI is shit". If AI is a tool workers can use, you can advance more surplus each working week from them.
You are playing games. Nobody is looking for value particles in 19th century machine or 21st century AI. We are talking about tools working people use. It would be superfluous for c level people to ignore AI , they are using it to cut the work force.
AI doesn't produce superfluous content, but rather reduces the labor time needed for the production of use-values. The market's reaction to AI advancements has complex effects, potentially leading to a decrease in required labor and a fall in profit rates. While AI may increase productivity, it doesn't necessarily increase the production of exchange-values, raising questions about the realization of these use-values in the market. This situation complicates surplus value extraction, as the value of labor power decreases, potentially leading to formation of a surplus population. Moreover, despite the potential for automation, it is becoming increasingly clear that executives don't always implement it fully, which raises questions about the reasons behind this hesitation.
It is about machinery, value of which tends to stay higher relative to labour power despite its mounting mass. The fall in the value or cost of means of production is inclined to be way slower than the increase in the mass of MoP. LP is to stay relatively cheap for ever. That's why capitalist hesitate to go full blown automation. You would be supposed to know this if you read capital volume 4.
Hey the rates of profit are no low enough. And money has never had bearing on the value, not unique to fascistic mode of production.
Stop jibbering.
Before we can discuss the rate of profit, please do all of your calculation concerning this measure in the same money that was used by Marx: gold or another commodity money. To do this, simply take the inverse of the price of the commodity money (gold, silver, etc.) and set this as your fixed standard of price in calculation.
No discussion. It is cross fire.
I said a gazillion things in previous comment. I will flesh it out ad seriatim.
1. Does not matter whether it is in terms of fiat or commodity. We are not dealing with the accumulation but the concentration. That is why it is the rate of profit, and of no bearing on value.
2. Who gives a flying f about the production/output in which capitalism reached its own limits? All that bourgeois is interested in is the value.
3. System continues employing superfluous labour to reach full employment, which ends up with the erosion on the total capital accumulated and advanced. That is value side of it. It continues using it to create ideological shield around itself. That is political.
3.5. State with its all employees are set to be superfluous. Not something new, rather, "arose from its own organisation".
3.75. Obdurate expansion and employment of unproductive is just for preventing capital from accoumulating and profits falling more.
4. Do you think capitalist is dumb enough not to be aware of profits falling with occ rising in tandem?
There is no workaround for him other than rolling back the system. That is a must leading to creative sublation of the system.
That's the point, isn't it? The capitalists are only interested in value, but value must be continuously destroyed...
Jehu, you've been done, cooked and served.
You potato.
Already? The timer is still running...