Untitled

[graduallyfuriouswonder]

AI fear and hype

One of the new big trends for today's generation is found on the popular social media platform Tik Tok. It is a new series that has captivated audiences throughout the world, bringing people closer together and making what could be a serious problem in our world, something entertaining. It's called ‘fruit love island’. An AI (artificial intelligence) generated spinoff of the popular show ‘ love island’, recreating the dramas and entertainment of the show, but with fruit. As silly as it sounds, it has broken records on the platform, becoming one of the most fast followed and popular creators. This begs the question: should AI be feared or hyped? 

There is a large debate throughout the world surrounding the usage of AI. It is seen as mostly a black and white problem that has two main viewpoints, fear and hype. Both of these viewpoints create more usage of artificial intelligence,whether it's using it to create stories to keep people entertained, solving problems on a day to day basis, or creating an economic disruption with pollution or taking away people's jobs. Everyone uses AI, even just a “hey siri” but it also has hidden costs; high energy consumption, mass water use, and the hazardous waste from the datacentres creating and contributing to pollution and the problem of environmental harm

If we look through an ideological lens at the problem, we can see that AI does use some aspects shown as a neoliberal and marxist angle. The neoliberal angle reflects the ideas that artificial intelligence is one of the ultimate tools showing progress, competition and economic growth by helping to generate profits and maintaining the economical growth of our current world. The Neoliberal perspective shows more of the hype side of AI, if we look at it as a marxist, we can see the fear. From a marxist perspective, AI can be seen to threaten traditional values like the labour structure and property relations. It is important to see the usage of AI through an ideological view, as the platform itself is neutral, it is the views of society or the user who chooses to empower the use of AI or reverie back to how we did before. 

The media plays a big role in how AI is perceived. As mentioned at the beginning of the blog, the use of AI can be used to entertain, the creators of these videos are also getting money for posting them, creating revenue off a piece of work they didn't create. They can be seen as taking away the jobs of reality shows, other creators on the platform, or even letting AI take over their creativity. But it can also be a good way to entertain, develop different ways of interpreting information or helping to create new ideas. 

The question at hand, should it be feared or hyped is all up to the way that society makes it out to be. It is like a mirror, in the sense that it shows the choices of our society and who they delegate the power to. As said before, technology is a neutral platform, the benefits, who controls it, the purpose of it, that will decide whether artificial intelligence will suppress us or empower us.

[graduallyfuriouswonder]

Fast Fashion

Today, it is easier than ever to buy a new top. It may be cheap and have a fast delivery time, but at what cost? Online shopping platforms such as shein and temu are just a couple of the many brands that are contributing to the rising problem of fast fashion. Quick and cheap are the two things people look for when shopping online. These factors however,  contribute to the rising questions about whether fast fashion does more harm than good to our environment and its workers, and if it is a sustainable way of making the clothes we wear. 

Fast fashion is more of a concept that has been taken over by many companies, a way to sell lots of clothes quickly at a low cost for them. Many brands such as Shien, H&M, Zara and many more popular brands use fast fashion as a way to make a profit. Many ways they do this is creating a fashion trend and mass producing a product, usually influenced by social media and influencers. These clothes are designed and made quickly for consumption and replacement. 

This raises an issue of are these trends existing to simply be a trend or to help these companies to generate more profit? I will use shien as an example. They use factories with underpaid workers in less than ideal working conditions to create lots of cheap replicas of popular clothing items. The idea that cheap clothes are better as everyone can buy them, provides a snake of freedom and choice for the consumer, but the clothes are not made to last. Companies such as Shien use fast fashion as a way to make a profit. This shows the qualities of a capitalist view, and it works because people keep buying it. It is mainly based on materialism, consumerism and capitalism. 

Fast fashion thrives on the system where the exploitation of its workers is woven through the clothes we wear, using underpaid labour and poor work conditions as an example as they produce  their products. Pushing beyond the industry's model that prioritizes profit over people and the planet, is a way that a socialist perspective is shown here. The socialist view urges people to rethink how the clothes/ items are made, distributed and and are striving for the fast fashion industry to change their system and create a new system where fairness, sustainability and dignity are portrayed. 

Conscious consumption is one of the main causes of a decrease in fast fashion. Instead of just buying it because it's cheap, these people question the process, the workers, and the environmental issues that come with fast fashion. Mass pollution from the factories and the cheaply made clothes that end up in a pile at a landfill. Also the poor labour conditions are an objection to many activist groups. These problems can cause conscious consumers to stop purchasing these items, and create a loss in revenue for the companies, but is that a bad thing? 

The role that consumers play in the fast fashion industry is the main thing keeping the industry afloat. However, as the industry is oligopoly, there will always be another empire just waiting to be re-built on top of the ashes of the past. So is it worth it?

[graduallyfuriouswonder]

Kendrick Lamar's halftime performance.

The most watched and one of the most influential superbowl half time performances happened last year with none other than Kendrick Lamar as the main performer. What many thought would be just an entertaining sing along performance became a discussion about identity, politics and cultural expression. Lamar had many collaborators such as SZA, Samuel L Jackson and Serena Williams who all represented something different through their individual performances. 

The use of Samuel L Jackso as “uncle Sam” in the performance was a powerful stance Lamar made. This use of  ‘black’ uncle sam incorporated the black culture deeply into Americas society The visual effects in this performance also helped to incorporate the demands of both the performance and in politics. With the use of his backup dancers, they from the American flag during the song “HUMBLE.” During the change of song, Lamar gets the dancers to disperse to the sound of gun shots and the dancers “shooting each other" symbolizing gang violence possibly surrounding the Compton crips as he is from competition. This idea is then backed up with Serena Williams performing the “cripwalk” later in the performance. This is done during the song “not like us” projecting the idea to the president (who was in the audience ) that theyre “not like us.  Once the dancers get back into the synchronized system, lights from the audience show the words” warning wrong way”. These themes add to the idea that the rpefromance was too political for a speorting event. 

Many people read into the performance as a platform for social and racial commentary. Lamar used it for America's biggest entertainment events to target the issues surrounding identity and inequality. The performance highlighted an artistic expression of identity, especially surrounding black culture. The use of the patriotic red, white and blue with the patriotic meaning can challenge the view of a conservative standpoint as it can be viewed by some as bringing politics into entertainment. The performance also highlighted identity politics strongly demonstrating how one event can be celebrated but also criticized. He used the event to capitalize his music and the event itself. With the release of a popular song “not like us” being performed, it created headlines for weeks after the event showcasing not only himself but the superbowl as well.  He has successfully strengthened his personal brand and his global influence through his performance. It also created the question whether people's culture was being turned into a product.

As this was a very public event, the performance had both strong positive and negative reactions. It was seen as powerful, meaningful and significant surrounding many topics of the media at the time. Others however saw the performance as ‘too political for a sporting event’ saying that the half time performance should be purely about entertainment purposes. The performance itself did not directly create any problems, but sparked the curiosity of people watching, making them think about the question in America surrounding race and identity. These topics are very important from a political point of view as it directly connects to power in society.

Kendrick Lamar's half time super bowl performance was very influential on many Americans. Raising questions surrounding identity and inequality within societies and bringing forward a problem which hadn't been talked about enough from a political standpoint. Lamar used his music to bring awareness towards problems in society.