You know how there's that genre of posts that's like "[screenshot of something horrid and dystopian happening with technology] hahaha, I sure hope nothing bad comes from defunding humanities while pouring boatloads of money into STEM"?
I need an inversion of that that's like "hahaha, I sure hope we don't run into any problems with masses of artists and writers deciding that it's fascist to understand the law and computer science."
Can you cite evidence of 'masses of artists and writers' who state that understanding law and computer science is fascistic?
Seems like there's a whole heap of artists and writers who create very angry work precisely because they understand law and computer science and have found a great many of its applications (not all) to be quite fascistic.
And to be a bit more nuanced (and again I think writers and artists by and large understand this) law and computer science themselves are neutral, people make them fascistic when they make fascistic decisions based on data they don't understand and refuse to acknowledge that at some point in the process a human being had to make a judgment on how to code an event, a person etc. or that intentional and unintentional biases can be ingested into LLMs through the human created work that goes into training datasets.
An artist and writer is also entitled to feel that computer scientists are being fascistic when they explicitly state they see no value in the work of artists and writers or that their great work is too important to pay the creators providing the data Legos that LLMs scramble together on command.
Similarly, writers and artists probably understand better than a lot of people that "criminal" is a socially constructed label that is applied to a person to make it legally possible to do the sorts of things to that person that are usually crimes: like commit violence against them or detain them against their will.
What is a crime or is not a crime or what is a law or not a law is not derived from a telescope or microscope, its decided upon by humans. People who are in the "imagining new things" business probably understand law and computer science quite well in the sense that laws and computer programs too were just imagined into existence and they can edited, deleted, or used very differently according to all too human motives.



































