With respect, exploitation of people with less power is not a function of your economic system - that's a human thing, that has and will happen under any system.
Technology is not the problem, protecting creators is
With respect, exploitation of people with less power is not a function of your economic system - that's a human thing, that has and will happen under any system.
The problem with this conversation is, this is all fundamentally political. All A.I. related conversation will revolve around politics. Not blockchain, blockchain is a tool/technology. Not one that has a useful use case, at least not until @Ruin Explorer make the proposal about property ownership, which is one I had not considered.
However, I think the political nature of this is self evident. Now any form of A.I. has the potential to stand our civilization on its head. So, any conversation about this topic on this forum is going to run slap bang into the site rules on politics.
However, I think the political nature of this is self evident. Now any form of A.I. has the potential to stand our civilization on its head. So, any conversation about this topic on this forum is going to run slap bang into the site rules on politics.
eyeheartawk
#1 Enworld Jerk™
That's 100% true. But also extremely reductive.
What's also true is that capitalism is explicitly designed to exploit the many for the benefit of the few. You can have your quote be true without also designing an economic system to explicitly do that very thing as a feature, right?
FrogReaver
As long as i get to be the frog
That’s true but some economic systems are much worse for human misery and exploitation than others. But I think getting more specific than that likely runs afoul of forum rules.
Agreed, this why North Koreas people are so much better off in standard of living than South Koreas…
Oh wait
Lassie fare capitalism doesn’t exist in any modern nation, it is always curbed by government policy. And properly curbed, capitalism has raised standards of living.
It is free from problems? Absolutely not…but it’s disingenuous to say that because a few have benefited tremendously doesn’t mean the general haven’t benefited
Rabulias
the Incomparably Shrewd and Clever
At least regarding real estate, it is a matter of policy, rules, and laws (which vary by locality, state, and country), not the technology. Where I live, real estate property records are public information and are searchable online, and I think this is true to varying degrees across the USA. A lot of locales might not have online access to it, but it is a public record. You might have to go to the records office to view the physical record books. The privacy-minded can get around direct public disclosure by buying their properties through corporations and trusts. They can do the same with blockchain.
eyeheartawk
#1 Enworld Jerk™
You'll note that my post never actually commented one way or the other as to the merits, or supremacy of any system (not becuase I don't wanna have a good internet argument, but because I don't want to tread too hard on the no politics rule). I simply pointed out the unambigious and objective structure around which it is built, and the fact that it was built that way intentionally. No economic system is hewn out of rock and exists as an inviolable law of nature like gravity.
We make them.
True, and a lot of this is just settled politics. That is the trouble with a lot of these conversations, particularly on this forum. At the heart of it are some big questions about how society is organised and that is as political as it gets.
I don't believe so. It is, instead, a clear indicator for where to look for solutions.
Every large-scale human system is hierarchical - this is a practical necessity. All of our economic systems, then, will vest economic power in whoever is at the top of the hierarchy. Capitalism merely makes it clear who those people will be. Whether the system is exploitative depends on what limitations are imposed on the top of the hierarchy - and that's where politics comes in, and our ability to talk about it on this site ends.
This is incorrect.
As an example - back in grad school, one of the thesis topics I almost took up was using what we'd now call "AI" to simulate high-energy particle physics data to use it to tune detectors and data analysis programs at particle accelerators. Nothing political about it.
The currently discussed uses of "AI" are political, but not all uses are.
Similar Threads
