• 0 Posts
  • 161 Comments
Joined 7 months ago
cake
Cake day: March 15th, 2025

help-circle

  • I think the more important thing, is for people to push to make AI a public good, rather than a corporate hegemony. If corporations are the sole creators and holders of AI, they will do all sorts of terrible things with their mastery. Publicly developed and open-sourced AI that is free for anyone to use, is important.

    The refusal for the public to truly make AI their own, would be akin to letting corporations to control every single printing press.



  • Another bit of Sartre, it very much describes the nature of ICE:


    JEAN PAUL SARTE

    They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The antisemites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert.

    If the Jew did not exist, the anti-Semite would invent him.

    [The anti-Semite attributes] all or part of his own misfortunes and those of his country to the presence of Jewish elements in the community, … proposes to remedy this state of affairs by depriving the Jews of certain of their rights, by keeping them out of certain economic and social activities, by expelling them from the country, by exterminating all of them …

    It is not unusual for people to elect to live a life of passion rather than of reason. But ordinarily they love the objects of passion: women, glory, power, money. Since the anti-Semite has chosen hate, we are forced to conclude that it is the state of passion that he loves.

    [The anti-Semite] fears every kind of solitariness… however small his stature, he takes every precaution to make it smaller, lest he stand out from the herd and find himself face to face with himself. He has made himself an anti-Semite because that is something one cannot be alone.

    [The anti-Semite is afraid] of himself, of his own consciousness, of his own liberty, of his instincts, of his responsibilities, of solitariness, of change, of society, and the world – of everything except the Jews. [He is] a coward who does not want to admit his cowardice to himself.

    Anti-Semitism, in short, is fear of the human condition. The anti-Semite is a man who wishes to be a pitiless stone, a furious torrent, a devastating thunderbolt – anything except a man.










  • I have a feeling that this is different from Beeg’s concern about client assets, but more about employee influence over the company? The idea of an equity limit might be a good addition to the Universal Ranked Income concept that I have cobbled together. Thank you. :)


    In any case, my notes has two things about my own take:

    1: Employees can vote for whether someone can obtain and retain their leadership position within their chapter and for higher rungs of the organization. Also, the pay grade of those leaders. Employees who are fired or retired from the company will receive 1:1 retirement pay over time, equal to the days and pay grade that they worked at the company, and can vote on any position of the company or those it has merged with. This essentially means that legacy employees can determine the leadership of the company, and cannot be made to ‘go away’ in a political sense.

    2: Stocks when sold, have two components. The first is that they pay an amount over a fixed time, that is more than what they were paid for. It cannot be be sold nor traded, until it has been exhausted of this payback value. When exhausted of value, the share can now be traded to another individual for money, or returned to the company for the value it was bought at. The company cannot refuse the return, nor offer an increased price. A share returned to the company can be reissued, which allows it to start paying the fixed value again. Secondly, people who hold a share can vote for company leadership*. People within leadership positions at the company cannot own stocks from their own organization.

    By requiring stocks to be held for a certain time before they can be traded, it makes it harder for stockholders to hoard and dispose of stocks when convenient. The gradual payout is a reward to people who buy stocks from the company. Presumably, the inability of stocks to have guaranteed value when they become tradeable will promote their return to the company.

    *It is assumed that we are operating within an economic system, where there are absolute wealth and asset caps. There is only so many shares a person can possess, and holding shares can prevent someone from owning a yacht or bigger house - they have to lose the shares to make room within the cap for things they enjoy. This helps limit the influence of individual stock holders.



  • I don’t think the purported numbers themselves are that important, the key bit is that AI is an advancing technology over this century. If we don’t rework our society to account for an oncoming future, people will get run over.

    If there is an overhaul of my nation’s Constitution, I would like economics to be addressed. One such thing would be a mechanical ruleset that adjusts the amount of wealth and assets a company can hold, according to employee headcount. If they downsize the amount of working humans, their limit goes down. They can opt to join a lotto program, that grants UBI to people whose occupation is displaced by AI, and each income that is lotto’ed by the company adds to their Capital Asset Limit.