The end game is a club of authoritarians and an end to liberal democracy worldwide.
Liberal Democracy inevitably leads to corporate capture and then Fascism, as the US is demonstrating beautifully right now.
The ideal form of government is Titoism, with strong repression of regressive forces.
Different people just aren't going to agree on social norms and some groups are going to abuse certain things more than other groups. In the past between freedom of association and low levels of migration people could kind of work that out but when you force people to use public services for everything that's completely impossible.
You get one or the other at most. Both at the same time is an immediate non-starter for pretty much everyone.
But I tend to think that most communists are neutral or positive in their attitude toward AI research. For example, according to a credible China expert, Xi Jinping has directed China to pursue AI research very aggressively.
Once that monumental task is done (and this is where we might disagree, but I'd be curious to hear your thoughts - my position there is not very firm!) I feel like looking at AI again - while keeping environmental constraints in mind, might be worth a try. The end goal would be utopian star trek post-resource-constraint society, a classless, socialist society in the humanistic sense - where everyone's needs are met and conflicts around resource allocation are a thing of the past.
Re your last edit - ask three socialists and you will get five conflicting takes, I definitely disagree with Xi on most things, though I do think he's doing a good job in things like building the Chinese high speed rail network.
I don't think most readers here realize just how little control the AI labs have over their creations and how reliant they are on trial and error for implementing what control they do have. Of course, as soon as it becomes critical to keep an AI under control (namely, when its capabilities start to exceed human capabilities) is exactly when a lab will stop being able to rely on trial and error: specifically, the next time the lab makes an unsuccessful try, the AI will tend to arrange things so that the lab doesn't get any more tries.
Things like freedom of speech or political organizations which are not subservient to the state?
Of course unrestricted freedom of speech can devolve into whatever has been happening in the US for quite a while but still... don't see how "enlightened totalitarianism" is an answer to that.
This tends to allow corporations to do all the bad things that states can do, with no checks or balances.
Other countries have a far larger mistrust of corporations and use their voice in the state to attempt to moderate that.
authoritarian state that restricts basic individual freedoms = bad
Not sure sure how could you have inferred anything else from my comment.
> Other countries have a far larger mistrust of corporations
Grass is always greener and such. Corporations in Europe have massive amounts of political influence. They are just not as good at making money as American corporations so have less resources to spend on stuff like that.
Does it? Is this a major problem in say Sweden, or Switzerland, or New Zealand?
That sounds an awful lot like victim-blaming.
What's worse is that your blend of comments somehow omits the fact that fascism is not being openly pushed onto people. Instead, fascists frame their intentions as granting them the authority to impose populist policies within the framework of liberal democracies. The problem is that, as Nazi Germany proved, once these fascists are in power they pull a bait-and-switch onto their own supporters.
Contemporary fascists pay lit service to it and like to accuse opponents of not being democratic. Tho, to large extend, conservatives lead by Trump are also doing what was known they will do.
That is a crazy way to phrase that. I think it reveals a lot about what democracy really means at a fundamental level.