What’s ‘enough’?

Oh well I’m talking about the one Bernie is proposing.

What’s your idea?

Just… continue to let the AI companies ‘self regulate’?

It makes perfect sense at any time, given that Bernie is calling for nationalizing half the shares in these companies, with no compensation or payment to the previous shareholders.

Costs the government nothing, because they’re just seizing the shares.

It would give the government a controlling interest in these companies, thus ability to regulate them.

That makes sense at any point in time.

Bernie is not proposing spending any money on acquiring these shares.

He is proposing simply seizing half of them.

So, the government gets a half stake, a controlling interest in these companies, for free, because we are the government and we say so.

So, that would mean the government can then directly regulate these companies, and if they become profitable, those profits can be poured into a soverign wealth fund, which could fund ubi or universal healthcare, etc.

It is a 50% share thus it is a controlling interest.

It would also simply be seized, not paid for.

Not what is happening.

Bernie is proposing the government simply seize half the shares.

Pay nothing for them, nationalize them, because the government is the government and can just do that.

Not even if the government just seized half the shares, at zero cost to the government?

You’d rather have only wealthy shareholders directly in charge of the company?

If the government just seizes half the shares, they get a controlling interest and can therefore directly regulate/run these companies.

Ok looks like I get to do this again on another thread.

Bernie is proposing the goverment seize half the equity, half the stock shares in these companies.

As in, no compensation, nationalize half the stake in these companies.

No public investment, the government would just do the equivalent of a stock split except half of the split stocks become government property.

Again, no public/government money would be used to purchase these shares, they would be seized.

Everybody calling this a bailout, the worst idea ever, is just showing that they either didn’t read the article or didn’t understsnd the words it used.

This ‘article’ is a shitty summary of a linked paywalled Bloomberg article.

Somebody needed to hit a quota, and that somebody’s name is Dustin Bailey.

Also I got hit with two near full screen pop ups demanding I susbscribe in about 10 seconds.

In conclusion, fuck this garbage website.

Internet money is like a series of tubes.

The System Is Down

whoo doo de doo doodle whoo doo de doo doodle

The System Is Down

whoo doo de doo doodle whoo doo de doo doodle

astoundingly racist, insulting reply

Well…

Very broadly speaking, yes, having a much more direct regulation of how you can use ‘AI’, and how you can ‘generate’ it, for lack of a better term…

Yeah. AI isn’t totally useless. It can do a lot of very neat and useful things.

But, if used improperly, it can literally destroy the world’s software systems.

Just in the last 24-48 hours, Meta put an AI in charge of its customer support for Instagram.

People figured out that you can just use a VPN to set your IP to the approximate location of any Instagram account, tell it ‘oh i lost my email, heres my new one, can you send me a password reset email?’… and it would just do it.

The AI got wired in to the backend of Instagram’s security systems… and then used them to bypass them, because it wss asked to, nicely.

You’d have to have actual experts, not in AI, but in software engineering, systems architecture, experienced full stack senior devs, make up like a council of mandatory safety practices, things that LLMs should never be allowed to be plugged in to.

The… original idea of like a decade ago, was that the people developing this … would do that, they’d self regulate.

Then they decided they’d rather be trillionaires.

And also, a whole lot of people are the boat you’re in, not understanding much about AI… but they’re also delusional narcissists who are highly susceptibls to being upsold by people they view as more successful than them.

So those people just hear ‘Use AI or be left behind!’ and then layoff half the company to afford some kind of not even half baked AI implementation… and the latest numbers are something like 90-95% of firms that adopted AI in the last 12 or 18 months saw 0 or negative overall productivity gain.

… because this shit is not actually magic.

So yeah, yeah, formal regulation, at a very direct snd engaged level… I mean like AI can easily do more monetary damage than a nuclear warhead going off in a major city, if used improperly, by dumb hairless monkeys that want an easy button instead of any actual work associated with running anything.

You’re right!

I was mixing up the acquisition/merger and IPO timelines.

What liability?

What does that even mean?

If I own a stock, a share of a company… what does that make me liable for, just owning the stock?

Do you think that like, if I own a stock, and the company gets sued or something… I personally have to help the company pay out the damages the company is liable for?

No that’s not how stocks or the law works.

If the company’s stock decreases in value after people hear about it having to pay out from a court case, then yeah the stock has less value now… but the government seized the stock, it got it for $0 dollars.

So there’s no net loss.

You are having an entirely different conversation at this point.

I’m talking about the specific proposed law from Bernie.

You’re talking about a whole whole lot more than that.

Yeah, I agree, we need to make a whole lot of changes over here, but… that’s way off topic.