3 ms·

So the solution is to allow the actual entrenched interests to determine the future of things when they also barely grasp how the current markets function and a

So the solution is to allow the actual entrenched interests to determine the future of things when they also barely grasp how the current markets function and are currently proclaiming to be futurists?

betaby 1y ago
Won't somebody please think of the children?
- johnisgood 1y ago
  Yes, a common rhetoric, and terrorism and national security.
buggyinout 1y ago
They’re demanding collective conversation. You don’t have to be involved if you prefer to be asocial except to post impotent rage online. Same way the pols aren’t futurists and perfect neither is anyone else. Everyone should sit at the table and discuss this like adults. You want to go live in the hills alone, go for it, Dick Proenneke. Society is people working collectively.
tjwebbnorfolk 1y ago
The best way for "entrenched interests" to stifle competition is to buy/encourage regulation that keeps everybody else out of their sandbox pre-emptively. For reference, see every highly-regulated industry everywhere. You think Sam Altman was in testifying to the US Congress begging for AI regulation because he's just a super nice guy?
- goatlover 1y ago
  Regulation exists because of monopolistic practices and abuses in the early 20th century.
  - dmix 1y ago
    That's a bit oversimplified. Humans have been creating authority systems trying to control others lives and business since formal societies have been a thing, likely even before agriculture. History is also full of examples of arbitrary and counter productive attempts at control, which is a product of basic human nature combined with power, and why we must always be skeptical.
    - verisimi 1y ago
      As a member of 'humanity', do you find yourself creating authority systems for AI though? No. If you are paying for lobbyists to write the legislation you want, as corporations do, you get the law you want - that excludes competition, funds your errors etc. The point is you are not dealing with 'humanity', you are dealing with those who represent authority for humanity - not the same thing at all. Connected politicians/CEOs etc are not actually representing 'humanity' - they merely say that they are doing so, while representing themselves.
  - keysdev 1y ago
    That can be, however regulation has just changed monopolistic practices to even more profitable oligarchaistic practices. Just look at Standard Oil.
  - tjwebbnorfolk 1y ago
    No, regulation exists because we all agreed it's not such a great thing to allow any company to do anything they want with no consequences. e.g, pouring toxic waste into rivers. But what started as a good thing has become a tool of those same companies to prevent competition. How we regulate needs to be rethought beyond the simplistic "more = better"
RestlessMind 1y ago
OpenAI was not an entrenched interest until 2023. Yahoo mattered until 2009. Nokia was the king of mobile phones until 2010. Technology changes very quickly and the future of things is hardly decided by entrenched interests.

betaby 1y ago

Won't somebody please think of the children?

johnisgood 1y ago
Yes, a common rhetoric, and terrorism and national security.

buggyinout 1y ago

They’re demanding collective conversation. You don’t have to be involved if you prefer to be asocial except to post impotent rage online. Same way the pols aren’t futurists and perfect neither is anyone else. Everyone should sit at the table and discuss this like adults. You want to go live in the hills alone, go for it, Dick Proenneke. Society is people working collectively.

tjwebbnorfolk 1y ago

The best way for "entrenched interests" to stifle competition is to buy/encourage regulation that keeps everybody else out of their sandbox pre-emptively. For reference, see every highly-regulated industry everywhere. You think Sam Altman was in testifying to the US Congress begging for AI regulation because he's just a super nice guy?

goatlover 1y ago
Regulation exists because of monopolistic practices and abuses in the early 20th century.
- dmix 1y ago
  That's a bit oversimplified. Humans have been creating authority systems trying to control others lives and business since formal societies have been a thing, likely even before agriculture. History is also full of examples of arbitrary and counter productive attempts at control, which is a product of basic human nature combined with power, and why we must always be skeptical.
  - verisimi 1y ago
    As a member of 'humanity', do you find yourself creating authority systems for AI though? No. If you are paying for lobbyists to write the legislation you want, as corporations do, you get the law you want - that excludes competition, funds your errors etc. The point is you are not dealing with 'humanity', you are dealing with those who represent authority for humanity - not the same thing at all. Connected politicians/CEOs etc are not actually representing 'humanity' - they merely say that they are doing so, while representing themselves.
- keysdev 1y ago
  That can be, however regulation has just changed monopolistic practices to even more profitable oligarchaistic practices. Just look at Standard Oil.
- tjwebbnorfolk 1y ago
  No, regulation exists because we all agreed it's not such a great thing to allow any company to do anything they want with no consequences. e.g, pouring toxic waste into rivers. But what started as a good thing has become a tool of those same companies to prevent competition. How we regulate needs to be rethought beyond the simplistic "more = better"

RestlessMind 1y ago

OpenAI was not an entrenched interest until 2023. Yahoo mattered until 2009. Nokia was the king of mobile phones until 2010. Technology changes very quickly and the future of things is hardly decided by entrenched interests.