4 ms·

No, because in practice it is not real people but corporations (institutional, ersatz paperclip maximizers that shall exist until some capitalist accidentally “

by zieben 4y ago

No, because in practice it is not real people but corporations (institutional, ersatz paperclip maximizers that shall exist until some capitalist accidentally “innovates” a real one) that control all the money and who gets it. We already live in a dystopia; the only difference is that, thus far, the adversarial AIs still need humans called executives to run them.

robertlagrant 4y ago
I disagree. The state controls the money to a great extent. It can take it, and it can make more of it, and it can lock you in a box if you don't give it, and it can force (some of) you to go and die fighting another country. Corporations are not perfect, but generally speaking they are just scaled up versions of individual workers. A one-person company or a 1000-person company might each need capital investment to get their business going. And they get money by providing value. They don't get to just have it. Now I'm exaggerating slightly, but it seems very odd to view the world as though corporations run it, other than to reflect the fact that corporations are made up of people.
- paulryanrogers 4y ago
  Except large corporations hold more money than workers, even if divided per worker. So they can lobby more effectively and gain both the power over private algorithms and regulations.
  - robertlagrant 4y ago
    Agreed, but I mean people (or groups of people) are doing it. To put it another way, there are two types of actor: - the state, who has the ability to pass laws, collect money on pain of being locked up, penalise/encourage businesses through tariffs and regulations, and change the value of money through inflation - people and corporations, who have to provide value to receive money You're right, any of those can do good or bad with the money they receive. But to say that corporations hold the most power because they can lobby the people who actually have power doesn't make sense to me.
    - paulryanrogers 4y ago
      Corps don't hold the most direct power. Rather governments so often defer to big companies or the same small club of rich and industry insiders that it's hard for workers to push back. Regulatory capture can also have the opposite of the desired result, yielding more power to companies instead of maintaining healthy societies.
      - robertlagrant 4y ago
        For sure. But regulatory capture is: 1) Government's fault. Don't get bribed and cosy with the industry you're regulating. We don't call cops teaming up with criminals "police capture". We call it corruption. 2) Predicated on governments being the biggest power, that rich companies can buy a small piece of their power.

by zieben 4y ago

robertlagrant 4y ago

I disagree. The state controls the money to a great extent. It can take it, and it can make more of it, and it can lock you in a box if you don't give it, and it can force (some of) you to go and die fighting another country. Corporations are not perfect, but generally speaking they are just scaled up versions of individual workers. A one-person company or a 1000-person company might each need capital investment to get their business going. And they get money by providing value. They don't get to just have it. Now I'm exaggerating slightly, but it seems very odd to view the world as though corporations run it, other than to reflect the fact that corporations are made up of people.

paulryanrogers 4y ago
Except large corporations hold more money than workers, even if divided per worker. So they can lobby more effectively and gain both the power over private algorithms and regulations.
- robertlagrant 4y ago
  Agreed, but I mean people (or groups of people) are doing it. To put it another way, there are two types of actor: - the state, who has the ability to pass laws, collect money on pain of being locked up, penalise/encourage businesses through tariffs and regulations, and change the value of money through inflation - people and corporations, who have to provide value to receive money You're right, any of those can do good or bad with the money they receive. But to say that corporations hold the most power because they can lobby the people who actually have power doesn't make sense to me.
  - paulryanrogers 4y ago
    Corps don't hold the most direct power. Rather governments so often defer to big companies or the same small club of rich and industry insiders that it's hard for workers to push back. Regulatory capture can also have the opposite of the desired result, yielding more power to companies instead of maintaining healthy societies.
    - robertlagrant 4y ago
      For sure. But regulatory capture is: 1) Government's fault. Don't get bribed and cosy with the industry you're regulating. We don't call cops teaming up with criminals "police capture". We call it corruption. 2) Predicated on governments being the biggest power, that rich companies can buy a small piece of their power.