4 ms·
Corporations are nothing but a group of actors working together to achieve some outcome, part of which may be profit, and it's absurd to think that they are a '
by jariel 6y ago
Corporations are nothing but a group of actors working together to achieve some outcome, part of which may be profit, and it's absurd to think that they are a 'Modern Era', or even Western concept as every single land-owning farmer, artisan, banker, merchant in history was de-facto a form of 'corporation'. Moreover, many institutions with origins in antiquity (schools, governments, NGO's) are close enough to the organising principles of corporations that they could be regarded in the same, broad, social categorisation.
His 18th century definition of 'Corporation' fits perfectly with the notion of 'Petit Bourgeois' of history - minor land-holding families, technical guilds, larger artisanal groups. Do we think Athenian 'Trireme' warships were built by a guy and his assistants? No, these were built by well organised groups with specialisation, paid for their work, aka 'Corporations'.
The most interesting thing about these talks are actually social: what kinds of ideas and memes will rise to the fore among people who are aspirationally antagonising, like social anarchists (I don't mean that in a negative sense, I mean that would be the closest technical 'ideal' that defines the a group like 'Chaos Computer Club'). Mohawks, anti-estabishment statements such as 'ardent atheist', and hints of softly anti-corporate ideals.
"Life-span of corporation is shorter, largely due to predation (totally unsubstantiated), corporation's are cannibals, they eat one another (that's an interesting way to describe mergers)."
"For the first century and a 1/2 they depended entirely on human employees" - no, actually, the Industrial Revolution was literally about harnessing the power of fossil fuels via machines to automate that which would have been done by people (or animals) before. Neither humans nor horses moved those trains.
And then of course the dehumanising of governments and corporations as AI: "What do our AI Overlords want?".
I don't believe there is really any relationship between 'corporations' and 'AI', it's a neat idea. What we have here is an intelligent, creative guy with an antagonists worldview, working in a field wherein he's free to make up loose associations and hint at them as they are facts, ad he's subsumed an interesting ideal from CS into his own world view.
I mean, it's great to try ideas that bends our minds a little bit, but I think it's clear he's a writer of fiction.
- einpoklum 6y agoCorporations are literally the something-extra over a "group of actors working together".
- jariel 6y agoI should have added 'with a charter' - and then, corporations are literally just that - formalised groups working together with some ostensibly stated purpose. The legal enfranchisement of such organisations is something contextual to the establishment of broader legal frameworks, which happened later in civilisation (i.e. Modern Era), but even then, one could apply the same ideal to Noble Houses, which derived their 'charters' from various agreements with the Sovereign. Like for example in the Magna Carta. These 'more fine grained legal articulations' of groups did not change the nature of what such groups were, they just put some boundaries around them. Merchants were merchants before they were codified as 'Corporations'. If anything, the modern notion of 'Corporation' actually does not derive very well from such organisations at all! Corporations with 'shares' are a neat legal construct to allow several businessmen to invest in something like a voyage from Venice to somewhere in Asia, whereby the surpluses will be divided upon return, and the corporation would cease to exist. Which is where we derive the term ''Executive Officers' -> of ships! The 'economic entities' that produced large warships in Antiquity for example, are in every practical sense - corporations - and certainly for Charlie's purposes of comparison to AI, it's exactly the same thing. There was no aspect to Charlie's 'formalised, legal' definition of a corporation which had anything to do with his AI comparison. He focused entirely on the organisational aspects, which predate the legal definition of corporations.
- choward 6y ago> formalised groups working together with some ostensibly stated purpose Increasing shareholder value. There is no other goal that any corporation has unless corruption is involved.
- drdeca 6y agoAren’t “public benefit” corporations a thing? Where they have both the goal of profit and also some other goal(s) set out in their charter or whatever?
- pdonis 6y agoNo, they aren't. Corporations don't magically do things that the group of actors working together don't do.