a post on corporate responsibility that does not mention concepts like "income" "inequality" "wealth" or even "politics" requires a bit of rounding out before i

a post on corporate responsibility that does not mention concepts like "income" "inequality" "wealth" or even "politics" requires a bit of rounding out before it's a complete discussion. the author touches on a few points but tiptoes around the biggest issue: corporations need to pay in to society by design, and AI will be disastrous if they are not forced to uphold that standard. the same goes for AI's potential impact on privacy and free speech-- these are major major issues, but they are not the only major major issues. economic inequality will continue to skyrocket if AI is remotely as efficiency-improving as everyone hopes; higher inequality tends to erode other democratic ideals like free speech, human rights, public political engagement/power, and the rejection of civil encoding of status. artificial intelligence will make it far easier for corporations to avoid their fundamental economic responsibility to pay for the society in which they operate and directly enrich the lives of people within society in multiple dimensions. this is already happening. this is a problem that needs a solution. ideally, AI is used to distribute resources for greater goods rather than entertaining individual gluttony for money. we need to start agreeing on the axiom that the purpose of corporate activity is to increase the standard of living of society and increased profit margins should mean increased burden of charity rather than merely more zeroes on a billionaire's wealth. that is the correct moral vision of corporate responsibility in the light of artificial intelligence. getting into the mud with details on human impact assessments doesn't serve the fundamental truth that AI-- for all the benefits it will bring-- is an existential threat to the status quo that everyone knows will kill that status quo off over time and replace it with a new and unknown one.