marx obv couldn’t comment on AI, but he did consider the effects of technological innovation relating to labor productivity in Wage Labor And Capital and the dilemma he described (as far as I understood it) was that capitalists will implement technology to enhance productivity in service of profit - not to make the work “easier” for the workers, and certainly not to redistribute those profits to the workers - but because with technology, they’ll be able to out-compete other capitalists. He used the example of a spinning machine to manufacture linen. Once one linen-manufacturer purchases and implements a spinning machine, he then has the ability to sell his linen for less, and still make an acceptable profit bc he can fire workers, lower wages, etc since the machine has squeezed more productive capacity out of his process
And once one capitalist buys a spinning machine, all the others need to as well, or they’ll be pushed out of the market. So this results in a tech arms race in which the worker loses out. They get fired, they see their wages decreased, their leverage over the boss is undermined, etc. And Marx does comment on what happens to workers who lose employment in this dynamic, arguing that rather than becoming spinning machine operators or manufacturers themselves to adjust to shifts in the production process, they just sort of struggle to subsist until they die bc it’s easier for capitalists to just hire a new generation of workers. Basically the 1846 rebuttal to “learn to code.” And re grimes, idk what to say really other than it’s weird to see your ex on social media, know what I’m saying fellas?