Last week brought a rare good-news story: Artificial intelligence (AI) enabled researchers to develop an antibiotic capable of killing an exotic superbug that had defied all existing antimicrobial drugs.
An AI-driven algorithm mapped out thousands of chemical compounds in key proteins of Acinetobacter baumannii, a bacterium that causes pneumonia and infects wounds so severely that the WHO had classified it as one of humanity’s three “critical threats.”
Once the mapping was done, the AI invented an effective drug with novel features compared to existing antibiotics. Without AI’s help, the life-saving antibiotic would remain a pipe dream. It was a scientific triumph for the ages.
Illustration: Mountain People
However, there is a nasty flipside.
Remember Chris Smalls, the Amazon warehouse worker who organized an employee walkout from the company’s Staten Island, New York, facility to protest working conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic?
Smalls shot to brief fame when it was revealed that, having fired him, Amazon’s rich and powerful directors spent a long teleconference planning to use character assassination to undermine his cause. Still, a couple of years later, Smalls successfully organized the first (and still only) formally recognized Amazon employees union in the US.
Today, such successes are imperiled by the same AI technology that produced the germ-busting antibiotic.
Smalls’ union was a bitter setback for Amazon managers, who had been trained for years to use any means, fair or foul, to prevent workers from unionizing. In a training video leaked in 2018, managers were coached to watch for warning signs of organizing activity. They were urged to use surveillance cameras outside Amazon’s warehouses to spot employees who linger after their shift, potentially seeking to persuade colleagues to join a union. They were also encouraged to eavesdrop on employees’ conversations, listening for phrases like “living wage” or “I feel drained.”
Soon after, software replaced, or at least aided, the bosses’ primitive surveillance methods.
In 2020, Recode reported that Amazon had purchased the geoSPatial Operating Console (SPOC) to monitor workers prone to unionization efforts. And Vice exposed how Amazon’s human resources department monitored employee listservs and Facebook groups to predict work slowdowns, strikes, and other collective action.
The software categorized worker traits and behaviors according to whether they were correlated with pro-union tendencies, but the software’s predictive power disappointed Amazon, so the company continued to rely on regional managers keeping tabs on workers the old-fashioned way.
All that has now been eclipsed by AI. Why keep an eye or an ear trained on employees, or purchase software to read their posts and Facebook pages, when a centralized AI can detect union-friendly phrases and behaviors in every Amazon warehouse automatically in real time and at zero cost?
Disconcertingly, union-busting AI relies on exactly the same scientific breakthroughs that yielded the germ-busting AI. Before AI, researchers categorized molecules as vectors that either contained or did not contain certain groups of chemicals. This was no different, and no more efficient, than Amazon’s SPOC software categorizing employees on the basis of their perceived temptation to form a union.
AI germ-busting programs, in contrast, rely on neural networks and machine-learning models capable of exploring chemical spaces that human researchers would need decades to survey. They are then trained to analyze the molecular structure of a germ’s proteins and to identify compounds with a high probability of killing it.
The AI union-busting programs rely on the same process. The only difference is that, instead of chemical spaces and molecules, AI explores warehouse spaces to focus on employees, whose real-time data are constantly uploaded to the program by the electronic devices they must carry everywhere they go in the workplace — including the toilet.
These AI-driven systems learn how to devise strategies to neutralize their programmed target, whether it is a bunch of proteins at the heart of a germ or a band of workers in the break room. In both cases, AI categorizes its targets into vectors that are used to maximize the probability of eliminating them.
It was inevitable. Humanity proved brilliant enough to develop AI algorithms capable of fully decoding a killer bug’s proteins — without any human input — and creating an effective antibiotic. Was there ever any doubt that conglomerates like Amazon would seize upon this opportunity to identify, and shrink, workplaces along their supply chain where AI predicts a higher probability of unionization?
Economists earnestly profess that the forces of demand and supply work reliably to ensure that technological change benefits us. This fiction allows them to avert their gaze from the vicious class struggle going on under their noses, wrecking the lives of millions while rendering the macroeconomy unable to generate — at least without untenable levels of debt — enough demand for the goods that the technology can produce.
Warren Buffett, who owes his success largely to ignoring economists’ illusions, famously quipped that the class war is real and that his class is winning it hands down. That was before algorithm-driven digital devices replaced foremen on the shop floor, dictating a pace of work and a total surveillance regime that made the factories in Charlie Chaplin’s Modern Times look like a workers’ paradise. As if that were not enough, AI is now empowering conglomerates to snuff out the only institution able to give workers a modicum of power in a world where they have next to none: Labor unions.
The class war Buffett acknowledged will soon pit AI-clad cloud-based capital in every sector against a worldwide precariat free only to lose and lose again.
Whatever one’s politics or aspirations, it should be clear that this economy is unspeakable and unsustainable.
Yanis Varoufakis, a former Greek minister of finance, is leader of the MeRA25 party and a professor of economics at the University of Athens.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
The return of US president-elect Donald Trump to the White House has injected a new wave of anxiety across the Taiwan Strait. For Taiwan, an island whose very survival depends on the delicate and strategic support from the US, Trump’s election victory raises a cascade of questions and fears about what lies ahead. His approach to international relations — grounded in transactional and unpredictable policies — poses unique risks to Taiwan’s stability, economic prosperity and geopolitical standing. Trump’s first term left a complicated legacy in the region. On the one hand, his administration ramped up arms sales to Taiwan and sanctioned
The Taiwanese have proven to be resilient in the face of disasters and they have resisted continuing attempts to subordinate Taiwan to the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Nonetheless, the Taiwanese can and should do more to become even more resilient and to be better prepared for resistance should the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) try to annex Taiwan. President William Lai (賴清德) argues that the Taiwanese should determine their own fate. This position continues the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) tradition of opposing the CCP’s annexation of Taiwan. Lai challenges the CCP’s narrative by stating that Taiwan is not subordinate to the
World leaders are preparing themselves for a second Donald Trump presidency. Some leaders know more or less where he stands: Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy knows that a difficult negotiation process is about to be forced on his country, and the leaders of NATO countries would be well aware of being complacent about US military support with Trump in power. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would likely be feeling relief as the constraints placed on him by the US President Joe Biden administration would finally be released. However, for President William Lai (賴清德) the calculation is not simple. Trump has surrounded himself
US president-elect Donald Trump is to return to the White House in January, but his second term would surely be different from the first. His Cabinet would not include former US secretary of state Mike Pompeo and former US national security adviser John Bolton, both outspoken supporters of Taiwan. Trump is expected to implement a transactionalist approach to Taiwan, including measures such as demanding that Taiwan pay a high “protection fee” or requiring that Taiwan’s military spending amount to at least 10 percent of its GDP. However, if the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) invades Taiwan, it is doubtful that Trump would dispatch
RSS