4 ms·

We as Americans at least have some amount of influence over American corporations, and enforcement mechanisms for those breaking the rules.

tcp_handshaker 4mo ago
[flagged]
- groundzeros2015 4mo ago
  I suspect the recent space X S&P decision had something to do with public perception.
  - Dylan16807 4mo ago
    The decision was to do nothing, though. That's not much precedent for going out and punishing lawbreakers.
  - somenameforme 4mo ago
    I think the odds of that are low. It's not like decision maker(s) are watching social media and going with the vibes, but it's almost certain that there's a rich conversation going on behind the scenes in opaque channels, especially with regards to the AI-only companies. And those conversations are likely what drove their decision.
    - groundzeros2015 4mo ago
      > It's not like decision maker(s) are watching social media and going with the vibes, What do you mean? They are all on twitter! It’s the most engaging activity for billionaires
      - somenameforme 4mo ago
        Lol, fair point! But I'd argue two things. The first is that few to none of them are changing their opinions due to the proles. The second is that public vs private opinions often differ, sometimes extremely, especially with influential people. For an example there I think it's fairly certain that some chunk of the people pushing AI believe it's a bubble, and are motivated solely by trying to squeeze the boom window for all they can personally extract. And so their public positions on things, and their private ones may different radically - especially in domains where they stand to win/lose as a result of those issues.
ajsnigrutin 4mo ago
I'm pretty sure those corporations have much more influence over american politicians, regulators, lawmakers, etc. than eg. russian or chinese ones.
- Avicebron 4mo ago
  Well sure they do, thank Citizens United and others for that. But that doesn't mean we can't appropriately categorize them as also hostile actors alongside russia, china, whoever. It's undo influence over politics against the best interest of the American people that's the issue. Company, foreign nation, it doesn't matter.
  - advael 4mo ago
    Citizens United did a lot to effectively legalize foreign influence as well, since the mechanism is opaque transfer of money But regardless, most people's threat models should discount based on geographic and political distance. All else being equal, chinese surveillance is a bigger threat to you if you're in china than if you're in the us, and vice versa
    - Avicebron 4mo ago
      > Citizens United did a lot to effectively legalize foreign influence as well, since the mechanism is opaque transfer of money Here's hoping Hawaii blazes a path forward. https://natlawreview.com/article/hawaii-governor-signs-first-its-kind-legislation-circumvent-citizens-united-legal https://natlawreview.com/article/hawaii-governor-signs-first...
      - twoodfin 4mo ago
        So the Honolulu Star-Observer (a corporation, or “artificial person”) only has those rights & privileges that it has been granted by the State of Hawaii? This is going to end up being a nice little windfall for the attorneys and otherwise just clog the Federal court system.

tcp_handshaker 4mo ago

[flagged]

groundzeros2015 4mo ago
I suspect the recent space X S&P decision had something to do with public perception.
- Dylan16807 4mo ago
  The decision was to do nothing, though. That's not much precedent for going out and punishing lawbreakers.
- somenameforme 4mo ago
  I think the odds of that are low. It's not like decision maker(s) are watching social media and going with the vibes, but it's almost certain that there's a rich conversation going on behind the scenes in opaque channels, especially with regards to the AI-only companies. And those conversations are likely what drove their decision.
  - groundzeros2015 4mo ago
    > It's not like decision maker(s) are watching social media and going with the vibes, What do you mean? They are all on twitter! It’s the most engaging activity for billionaires
    - somenameforme 4mo ago
      Lol, fair point! But I'd argue two things. The first is that few to none of them are changing their opinions due to the proles. The second is that public vs private opinions often differ, sometimes extremely, especially with influential people. For an example there I think it's fairly certain that some chunk of the people pushing AI believe it's a bubble, and are motivated solely by trying to squeeze the boom window for all they can personally extract. And so their public positions on things, and their private ones may different radically - especially in domains where they stand to win/lose as a result of those issues.

ajsnigrutin 4mo ago

I'm pretty sure those corporations have much more influence over american politicians, regulators, lawmakers, etc. than eg. russian or chinese ones.

Avicebron 4mo ago
Well sure they do, thank Citizens United and others for that. But that doesn't mean we can't appropriately categorize them as also hostile actors alongside russia, china, whoever. It's undo influence over politics against the best interest of the American people that's the issue. Company, foreign nation, it doesn't matter.
- advael 4mo ago
  Citizens United did a lot to effectively legalize foreign influence as well, since the mechanism is opaque transfer of money But regardless, most people's threat models should discount based on geographic and political distance. All else being equal, chinese surveillance is a bigger threat to you if you're in china than if you're in the us, and vice versa
  - Avicebron 4mo ago
    > Citizens United did a lot to effectively legalize foreign influence as well, since the mechanism is opaque transfer of money Here's hoping Hawaii blazes a path forward. https://natlawreview.com/article/hawaii-governor-signs-first-its-kind-legislation-circumvent-citizens-united-legal https://natlawreview.com/article/hawaii-governor-signs-first...
    - twoodfin 4mo ago
      So the Honolulu Star-Observer (a corporation, or “artificial person”) only has those rights & privileges that it has been granted by the State of Hawaii? This is going to end up being a nice little windfall for the attorneys and otherwise just clog the Federal court system.