214
A Majority of Americans Now Support Seizing Wealth From AI Industry (www.einnews.com)
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by to c/technology@lemmy.world
34 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://piefed.world/c/tech/p/1261690/a-majority-of-americans-now-support-seizing-wealth-from-ai-industry

While 89% back mandatory safety disclosures, nearly 70% support requiring AI firms to transfer 50% of their stock to a public fund

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 3 months ago (1 child)

if this doesn't become profitable in a mainstream way

This is exactly what I meant by Bernie being caught up in tech CEO bluster. He can't imagine that this shit doesn't change the world in monumental and lucrative ways. He's talked about how the tech people he's spoken to don't like his proposal because they don't want to share the profits, but I haven't seen any CEO make public comments one way or the other. With everyone involved knowing it's a bubble, I'm sure they secretly love to insure their investments with public money. They just can't say it out loud or the bubble might pop early.

And, yes, people of every age are tech illiterate. But overwhelmingly the elderly are the people crafting legislation about tech. Old age is heavily associated with cognitive decline, which makes it harder to understand, examine, and interrogate unfamiliar ideas, such as "AI" or "Whatever the Fuck Private Equity is Doing Right Now." Bernie's a smart guy, and it seems like he's still sharper than a lot of his contemporaries, but you can't fight nature. I'd rather see him cosponsor legislation with a younger senator and mentor the next generation of congress, instead of hanging on to the bitter end and giving us half-baked policy like this.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Yes. Agreed. But it's the Business aspect of this and his inability to understand that that I question. We have seen this before with government bailouts.

    It seems like the idea is that if every American owns a piece of the pie so to speak, then we actually get something from bailing these companies out or rather insuring them with our tax dollars.

    But what he can't seem to see is that this is exactly what businesses would want if they know they exist in a bubble.

    We accuse a lot of politicians of being on the take, or invested in businesses that are a conflict of interest, and I think that assumptions clouds our ability to really honestly look at their poor understanding of business and economics.

    I have to assume he thinks that these companies will pay us back for the bailout. That's pretty much what happened (supposedly) with Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. Even though they didn't receive a loan and there wasn't really any language in the agreement that legally bound them to pay back the bailout. But really what happened is the government just took over these companies (via conservatorship), and so even though the bailout has been ended, we haven't really gotten our money back, the damage goes very far beyond the monetary bailout, and the housing market is worse than ever. The loan market is worse than ever.

    So what I'm saying is, the terrible business acumen/literacy of politicians combined with the vast majority of them using elected office to further enrich themselves is often overshadowed by how tech literate they are and one of those things is far more dangerous in the long term. Because most young people might be tech literate to some degree but they aren't business savvy by and large so electing younger officials doesn't solve this problem.

    Bernie doesn't have to be tech literate. But he should at the very least have the pattern recognition to put two and two together and see that this isn't the first time.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent