This is a first world manipulation into some kind of contrived "workers unite" hit piece.
This has nothing to do with real AI and instead this author is trying to pass off hacks and gapfills as an entire industry or pursuit for the purpose of manufacturing suffering or abuse that isn't there.
This author has a terrible perspective.
If we have to enslave the whole world for 1 year to build an AI that elevates all for eternity. Would you do it?
> If we have to enslave the whole world for 1 year to build an AI that elevates all for eternity.
I think this shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the issues in the article.
Using your analogy, the article is asking the question: "if we have to continually enslave entire nations to build an AI that a single private corporations benefits directly from, and individuals in first world countries benefits indirectly from. Would you do it?"
The reason it's unethical is because of the system of exploitation we live in. So to answer your question yes, if we remove that system of exploitation and everyone benefits equally after suffering equally for a year I would "press that button" so to speak. The problem is that's not the reality for AI and those who work to support it.
This has nothing to do with real AI and instead this author is trying to pass off hacks and gapfills as an entire industry or pursuit for the purpose of manufacturing suffering or abuse that isn't there.
This author has a terrible perspective.
If we have to enslave the whole world for 1 year to build an AI that elevates all for eternity. Would you do it?