• huginn@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    15 days ago

    I mean yeah: if we went and killed every person who benefits from conflict diamonds and closed all blood diamond mines why wouldn’t you be cool with using the resources? Their evil origin has little to do with their practical utility and if the original sin is expiated there’s no reason not to?

    Like yeah conflict diamonds have basically no purpose because we can make diamonds cheaper and better in labs but in a situation where there are more practical uses (cobalt, LLMs) once we cleanse the land of the sinners why wouldn’t we use their ill gotten gains for good?

    • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      14 days ago

      Do the concepts “reparations” or “compensation for loss and damage” mean anything to you?

      The people who were exploited should be the ones to benefit from those diamonds.

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        14 days ago

        The people who were exploited should be the ones to benefit from those diamonds.

        i mean probably, but this would be a question of what the law says. If we’re talking philosophy that’s irrelevant here, but to include it anyway, it would be something like “the most ethical source of any given item should be most preferred over any other source of said item” or if we’re operating under an ideology of anti-human exploitation idk where we would even start. You need a really concrete definition of exploitation, and how to combat it effectively, without just exploiting more people.

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          14 days ago

          Sounds like you think we should use the diamonds. I wouldn’t be cool with using those diamonds because they belong to the people who were forced to mine them, not me.

          • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            14 days ago

            I wouldn’t be cool with using those diamonds because they belong to the people who were forced to mine them

            well most of them are dead aren’t they? Are we going to put them back into their coffins? Or, how are we planning on redistributing these?

            Dead people can’t own things, so that seems like an illogical conclusion, perhaps their estate or family? They didn’t do the work, but they would arguably be most entitled to it.

    • PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      14 days ago

      But we’re not “killing” every person who benefits, literally or figuratively. We’re continuing to buy their diamonds (pay them in money and data) while they continue to mine (train new models, use copyrighted material).

      • huginn@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        14 days ago

        Agreed.

        But the entire point I’m making is there’s nothing wrong with the diamonds, the problem is with the method and the people profiting from it.

        You were saying the diamonds were not fine by dint of origin. I’m saying let’s right the wrong and then use the diamonds.

        • PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          14 days ago

          It’s not a perfect analogy, models ape the work of artists and take their jobs; it’s like if the diamond was bloody, and as long as it existed, the miner’s family not only didn’t get compensated for the loss but we’re also prevented from getting jobs themselves.

          We’re not righting the wrong, were making the wrongs even worse. At some point you have to just burn the whole thing down.

        • Jtotheb@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          14 days ago

          Okay, so again, no new machine learning ever, unless you can prove it’s done without environmental impact or affecting peoples’ right to a dignified existence. That’s the wrong righted. That’s what you’re advocating. Am I misunderstanding?