Better idea: drive a stake 50% through AI CEO’s chest. Better, faster results, not just economically, but ecologically too!
They’ll just elect another.
Stakes are reusable.
As the French showed if enough heads roll you may end your monarchy. Might flirt with a dictator in the process, but that can also be taken care of
Yeah but the dictator will kill the sans-culottes who get uppity and the response to excess headrolling is reaction and moderation of the more radical goals of the process. Burn the guillotine, as the Parisian communards did.
That just raises CEO salaries because it proves my ongoing theory that CEOs get paid as much as they do to take the fall for everything the company does so the shareholders don’t lose money.
I agree! Just blow the brains out of the tech broligarch chud billionaires!
deleted by creator
That’s no reason not to ask
Giving up only means that it will never happen. Having the balls to demand, it means it will at least remain a thorn in the Nazis side.
And if you ever propose the argument, other than “fuck the Nazis“, then I can’t see why anyone should ever back you
Agreed, you miss 100% of the shots you don’t take.
To take it a bit further: this is why the elite echelon of society is full of narcissistic assholes. Normal people feel shame when asking for more than their fair share. All the rich know is “gimmee” and “mine” so they naturally plunder their way to the top through their shamelessness and lack of self reflection and empathy.
Normal folks could get a bit more shameless about demanding our fair cut and a huge chunk of the rich and powerful could stfu and shamefully reflect on everyone they exploited to get to where they are. Actually we could all reflect a little more because even the low middle class American/European lifestyle floats on a pool of blood and exploitation, even though we like to pretend our shit doesn’t stink.
We talk about “top-down” economics. How about “bottom-up” instead. Once everyone has free healthcare. Once everyone has food. Once everyone has basic human rights. Then, and only then, does the money trickle up so you can buy a yacht. The incentive to make society succeed is still there, but suddenly there’s an incentive to uplift the most vulnerable instead of ignoring, mistreating, or even exterminating them.
How about tax hikes that slow down when quality of life indicators go up. The faster and more comprehensively corporations unfuck their shit, the slower we hike it. Comply or pay.
I know this already a wall of text, but I also want to tie it in with bargaining. Have ya’ll ever been to a big street market in a country with shopkeepers who are extremely skilled and shrewd when it comes to bartering? The rich and powerful are the shopkeepers and we’re the naive American tourists flooding the market. They’re gonna tell you that their kids are gonna starve if they knock $10 off that fake Rolex or that their boss will be angry. They definitely try to make you think that it cost them more than the screaming deal they’re giving you. That’s not always true, but the narrative is often effective to separate the tourist and their money. We have to be shrewd, we have to be cutthroat, and we have to be willing to walk when companies don’t play on our terms.
All of text? You can’t defeat my argument with points I never raised. At this point, you’re just defeating yourself.
I understand your frustration, but if all you can think of is ways to lose, you’ll never think of ways to win
Except the nazis who matter don’t give a shit. You think musk is going to give this a second thought? All this amounts to is a distraction. The problem with bills like this is they take away resources from something that can do some actual good.
It brings it up for further bills. Adds history. Precedence that its worth making a law.
Does it add meaningful history or precedence? There was a MN State Legislator that proposed a bill to formally define Trump Derangement Syndrome as a mental illness. It was a worthless “look-at-me” attention grabbing bill that never had a chance at passing. Did it move the needle at all for conservatives or was it just something they could chuckle about with all their idiot friends? I’d bet good money you won’t see such a massive shift in American sentiment with regards to corporate profit in your lifetime if it ever could pass. So to propose a bill like that does nothing.
Except the nazis who matter
And you automatically lose this round of “are you a piece of shit?”
This would be a nicer place if everyone extended a little grace to each other. It seems unlikely that the commenter meant “the Nazis who personally, emotionally matter to me” and pretty likely that they meant “the Nazis who are unfortunately very powerful.”
Maybe you’re right. But if they automatically give in to the powerful fascists, then what use would they be in a fight against them?
In a war against fascists, against Nazis, one must consider their collaborators as fascists, as Nazis
If I’m living in 1941 Paris, and I turned in my gay neighbor and my Jewish friend, how am I any better than any SS officer marching down the street?
Of course, without any consideration, I’m obviously not. I might as well be shoveling bodies into ovens at Auschwitz.
There are no shades of gray here. The evil herein is black and white, and quite absolute.
And never forget: unforgivable
But if your fight against the nazis will only waste your energy and have no discernible effect on their cause, what good is it? In fact, your fight could serve the opposite purpose if it feeds their persecution complex. They can point to your failed fight in propaganda to fuel their movement. I’m saying fight smarter, not necessarily harder. I’m not saying don’t fight at all.
But if your fight against the nazis will only waste your energy and have no discernible effect on their cause, what good is it?
That’s not the starting point in the argument we’re dealing with because that is not the reality of the situation. And if your counter argument is against propaganda, then dishing out a bunch of propaganda about how the winning side is losing, then I dare say the first thing you need to deal with is how you’re drowning in hypocrisy.
deleted by creator
I feel that logic is flawed.
If you ever feel that “fuck the Nazis” is flawed logic, then you’re a Nazi
And you have no logic to argue
deleted by creator
Who would vote for it other than Sanders?
Dems are as deep in the tank for the AI companies as any Republican.
It’s a bad idea anyhow. We can’t afford the water and hazard of all the electricity use. Plus, it’s going to all loose money for another 10 years.
Keep your eye on the ball: 100% of the profits must pay for universal healthcare.
I love this idea, but I’m not sure if any AI company has made any profit to date lmao
No AI company will ever make a profit.
That’s no excuse for you to forget that human rights is our ultimate goal.
Never take your eye off the ball. Vote for humans. Fight for human equality. 🏳️🌈
The thing is, their values are overstated. It’s a bubble economy. AI companies are racing for IPO specifically because they want to leave the public holding the bag when it finally crashes.
I don’t want any stake in AI companies.
Government sponsored public investment funds should focus on stable, long-term investments and basic essentials like utilities, telecom, housing, agriculture, etc.
I would include healthcare and education in that list but I believe those things shouldn’t be monetized at all and should be entirely non-profit.
But AI though is not a good investment. It only looks like one now because it’s a pump and dump. A ponzi scheme, even.
I expected Bernie to be better than this…
No AI company will ever make a profit.
Microsoft, Facebook, and NVIDIA all make enormous profits.
Not from AI, except for nvidia who sells the tools for others to lose money on AI.
Year over a year, those profits are plummeting.
AI companies, themselves, have never made a profit
Like AI, you’re hallucinating
AI companies, themselves, have never made a profit
Might as well say Internet Explorer has never turned a profit.
They’re being incorporated into highly profitable software vendors and foisted on profitable businesses.
Meanwhile, the companies producing the models are rapidly enriching their owners and early investors. That looks like profit to me.
All Ponzi schemes look profitable until they run out of fresh rubes.
Nvidia yes, all the others I’m not so sure: https://isaiprofitable.com/
Microsoft has shoehorned so much of their AI into it’s OS that it’s the same product.
Whether this tanks their OS sales remains to be seen. But your site is trying to draw a line that no longer exists.
NVidia is the one selling shovels to the golddiggers, a business that always was a profitable one. If AI goes bust, they can go back to selling GPUs to gamers.
Microsoft makes profit because they get paid by OpenAI for their Azure platform.
Facebook makes profit because of ads? Don’t know why they were even mentioned here, their AI experiments seem mainly invested in making better bots for their platforms.No AI Company is profitable in any way, and barring some technological breakthrough, they never will be. Currently it’s all subsidized with huge dollar amounts by venture capitalists. The problem is that inference is expensive (You need a specialized datacenter for Nvidias new hardware, the hardware itself is expensive, the training of models costs a lot and you can never stop training new ones just to keep up with the joneses, you need lots of power to run all of this, and the GPUs used have to be replaced on the regular).
At the moment it all gets propped up by the largest financing rounds ever, and that is without even counting the Venture Capital that gets funneled to OpenAI/Anthropic through AI startups.
Especially the subscription model will disappear very soon. Users with 200$ Subscriptions blow through tokens costing a multitude of what they pay. API pricing per token will be the default, and those prices will make every single AI startup weep as soon as the subsidies disappear, and then close up shop, which will be the beginning of the end for OpenAI/Anthropic.
deleted by creator
Are you a one issue voter?
I mean, if they are, life quality of humans is a hell of a valid issue.
Well said
Yeah they got me on that one
They need to be funding UBI with it too. Every time a company kills a job because of AI they need to be taxed and that should go to UBI.
Absolutely
What profits? All AI companies have major losses. Except Nvidia of course, which just sells the hardware to the other companies so that they can make a loss.
At best, this will just socialize the losses made by decisions of capitalists.
Yes, that was the joke
Perhaps the sarcasm was lost in the comment somehow?
I just corrected a misspelling in my original comment. Perhaps that clears things up?
First of all, fuck no. Remove all of the AI companies. Now. Secondly, this will guarantee they become “too big to fail”. Like, it feels as if they’re purposefully doing this to make it palatable to bail them out.
I think the intention is to get the profits of automation to the people when more jobs are inevitably automated.
It is, but unintended consequences.
With this, then we couldn’t afford Sam Altman to experience failure because he will drag folks down with him. So the companies invested become too big to fall, and the still private leadership gets to run things however they wish knowing the government will cover for any mistakes.
It’s bad enough as the government will panic about retirement accounts when they falter, this exacerbates it.
It’s a risky form of private-public partnership, with a lot of ways the company can privatize rewards but socialize the risk.
Why does it matter that Altman fails when there are so many other companies waiting to take their place?
Because in this scenario, taxpayer money has been tied into the “winners” already. So that company eager to take his place? Well, that’s bad news because the taxpayer fund already picked his company to be the right answer. So we want to prop up Altman and discourage that upstart that might disrupt this theoretical fund.
Same reason why OpenAI was pushing for regulation that they get to shape. Easy for OpenAI to navigate, hard for newcomers to get going.
it actually creates symetry for risk/reward, but it does incentivize giving skynet contracts with argument that people get 50% of the proceeds from skynet abuse.
Doesn’t really create symmetry for risk/reward, because, for example, the corporate leadership decides how much to pay out to investors versus how much they spend including a lot of their own compensation.
So they can carve out the reward as they see fit, but if things go bad they can lean on the public investment as leverage to get bailouts.
This feels like a setup to the biggest rug-pull in history. The whole thing is going to shit and the taxpayers will be holding the bags.
I think it makes sense. The bill will be paid off from taxes, so it makes sense that the bailout comes with company stock transfer to workers.
It’s fair for many reasons. One of them is that billionaires and corporations don’t pay taxes.
What about, instead of 50%, make the bailed out company be 100% owned by the people - not the government, the people.
By the time the public own it, it will be a liability, not an asset. I’ve seen my government purchase a telco’s entire infrastructure only to immediately write it off.
Just set it on fire already.
yep lol and thats how it will work. we’ll get a bunch of data centers with a 5 year lifespan and 30 years of debt strapped to them.
Bruh they are working on deregulating debt swaps so they can hide how much leverage is going into these build outs. Trillions of dollars of data centers with mortgages and rent to own NVDA chips. its looking like the greatest scam of all time rn.
50% is very specific and very fishy on bernies part, is he being paid by them to say this. benefit of the doubt he isnt, but many DINOs are currently being paid by AI companies to force datacenters into thier states.
These AI companies rushing to do IPOs so the public’s retirement account index funds can buy them up and take the loss for them, too.
These people need to suffer real consequences.
well said. The problem is they are overvalued anyway… so we take half of a trillion dollar company that only worth 30% of that number, so we take a big ass loss. unless we are just straight up taking half and there’s no compensation provided. can’t imagine the SRCOTUS riding with that policy.
Always seeing these kinds of messages and kinda curious, I guess you mean LLMs with all AI and not truly all ai? Cause there are a lot more stuff under that umbrella term thats super useful for example in medicine etc
Yes, LLMs, the article refers to it in that manner so I did too.
Does this mean we’ll all be bag holders when the AI bubble bursts?
We are already holding the bag.
They are “too big to fail”
It is the de way
They’re very much not. They have high valuations, but very few employees. Very different to the banks (where the public would lose money) and the car firms (who employed large numbers of workers)
Guess where the publics money is invested?
Pensions and other investments, yes.
Not current accounts which was what was at risk in 2008. When the bank goes bust you don’t just lose money. You become unable to do anything financial, like get paid.
We didn’t just bail the banks in 2008.
Now do the US Auto Makers.
Who are still making terrible decisions
Read the thread. Already did that.
How? The government doesn’t plan to compensate the companies.
Are you new here? The government will absolutely compensate the companies when the bubble bursts.
Yes but not when it seizes half the companies
They already are! The government signed exclusive military contracts with OpenAI to develop autonomous weapons. Half of these AI companies are being propped up with taxpayer dollars in the form of government contracts or subsidies, or the promise that there will be a taxpayer revenue stream coming their way in the near future.
That’s for technology, not for equity.
The point being, if the public owns half of the company but the company is failing, now the public has acquired 50% liability of a dying business.
Like others said though, I’m sure taxpayers will be on the hook either way.
Do these companies have liabilities?
50% might have been a fair cut if they actually asked for permission up front,but they didn’t. Everything made by AI is fruit if the poison tree and should be something equal to public domain.
When I found out what it meant when other countries have sovereign wealth funds…
I have no idea how most people in America keep convincing themselves they’ve somehow got a good deal.
It’s mostly oil countries that have a sovereign wealth fund and it comes out of the oil money. Norway, Saudi Arabia. Idea being that oil is a limited resource with a lot of value and the proceeds should be used to ensure everyone’s future.
Of course the US IS an oil country…
You know they will agree and give everyone stakes exactly when bubble is about to pop
Public stake isn’t for profits (especially not short term capital gains), it’s about concentration & not getting controlled.
Controlling something worthless is pointless anyway.
And giving it away to everyone will score political points.
Wdym away to everyone?
50% seems very low. They created these companies by scraping and pirating information.
50% means that they just need to fool a few people to get what they want. Imo it should be more like 90% public with a requirement that all services must be provided for free.
How about a 50% stake in all companies valued over 5 billionaire dollars.
how about a 100% stake in all companies
Join lemmy.ml doesn’t fill me with confidence that that would work out well.
tankies are fucking idiots and probably feds to wreck the concept of socialism, the US government has a long and storied history of such behavior
Very true.
Ummmmm one of the main targets of COINTELPRO was the CP USA and their support of the USSR, even in Hungary and Prague.
Which is where the term “tankie” literally comes from.
You seem to be arguing against your own post.
the US infiltrates leftist groups to sow division, to prevent them from making progress and acting as wreckers.
tankies redirect leftist energy away from organizing in a way that would be effective, and instead towards supporting imperialism of a different color
i believe that this is probably supported by state actors, likely including the CIA
just my little conspiracy theory. it doesn’t really matter if its true or not, the fact remains that tankies are fucking dipshits and that socialism shouldn’t be judged by a minority of loud dipshits
Yeah, this is the same stupidity as when ‘tankies’ claim socdems are CIA.
Even the use of the term just shows the person using it isn’t bothering with actually thinking, they just want to mark a border of themselves as the only true leftist, and everyone else as to the right.
It’s nonsense and smells of terminal online nonsense that produces no form of actual change.
ok
Wait, so the workers would control the things that let us produce value?
Sounds familiar somehow . . . .
yes, socialism good, capitalism bad
Boom.
I don’t know how you divide it up amongst countries but I like where your head is.
rare bernie L
just do socialism. stop this wishy washy bullshit. capitalism must die.
“Just”
not saying it’s going to be easy but we just need to accept that capitalism cannot be reformed before we progress to the next step: how can we abolish capitalism and create a world that is just
“Rare”
Also believing that the AI overlords wouldnt murder him and everyone he knows before giving the public anything.
Bernie wants to nationalise AI companies. This is National Socialism.
(/s)
Pretty horseshit to act like they trained AI on only American data so only Americans should benefit.
What about the literal entire rest of the world? They get nothing right?
Just another example of America exploiting the world for their own benefit. Even the good ones are so corrupted by their system that they do it without realizing.
Yeah, it has the same vibe as:
“Bernie Sanders proposes bill to give US-Americans 50% stake in military contractors.”
What are you suggesting should have been done here?
How about a fund that spreads out the money globally?
How about reinstating US international AID at a bare minimum?
Not the right move dawg
If this ever passed, I bet we’d see a pretty quick devaluation in these things.
I’m okay with that. The bubble is going to burst eventually.
Wouldn’t this make everyone interested in the bad business practices that would increase the profits?
It makes sure that the public benefits from mass automation.
Government. We are not the government.
https://cdn.mises.org/anatomy-of-the-state.pdf
It’s a very short book. And it’s covered pretty convincingly in the first chapter no less.
Yes but stocks go up when AI gets more market power, exploits more privacy, sells more data to vested interests. The public would then have an interest in all that. Or at least this interest would compete with privacy interests. It may make it harder to push the company to do something, no?
More likely in would just exarcerbate the financial instability of the AI industry and hasten its downfall, which I’m all for
Or delay it. How would the government having 50% stake in an industry make it less stable? Now the government will form policy around protecting its stake. This will delay a collapse that we should want to happen sooner than later, and ideally be as divested from as possible.
