Up to you whether you want to limit your answer to software that is possible/realistic

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

There would need to be sufficient market depth to pay someone to act.

If such a platform existed so many people would bet for "fire" that there wouldn't be depth, but if you take a look around lemmy you can see some people hate AI so much they would do it anyways.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 hour ago*

    If there's so little depth that they're not getting a significant reward, then that's where we are right now. Looking around you and I see the same thing - a bunch of Lemmings with big words and no action. We have no mechanism of coordination because centralized organizations get censored, like with the Taft-Hartley Act or the CIA abroad.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (1 child)

    I assume you're talking about Lemmings betting against fire because they want data centers to burn.

    If there's a lot of people betting, then why wouldn't there be depth?

    If the data center is causing measurable harm, then a victim losing the bet against fire is still a net gain. If you're acting rationally, then you can afford to do it repeatedly — like insurance. But if people are just flushing their money down the toilet because they hate something and gain nothing from its loss, then they'll go broke.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment