They’re unprofitable. This is just socializing losses
Profit isn’t the goal with nationalized sectors in fairness; nor should one want that (obvious example being single payer universal Healthcare). The question is whether or not these systems can be regulated and in the public eye, if they have a benefit to society. Which realistically, the genie is never going back in the bottle on this. Much like the internet itself, pros and cons.
Shareholders don’t pay out of pocket for losses
Welcome to America!
This genai garbage should be burned to the ground, not validated.
I don’t want 50% of your “spewing raw sewage into people’s houses” business, I want that business to go away.
I thought that was Tesla’s battery factory.
The only stake I want is the one to kill those billionaire Nosferatus.
How about we just tax their profits at 50%?
100% there are no profits, they produce nothing.
Agree. Tax their revenues, and mark any infusions of cash as revenue.
Companies will always spend away profits to a neg zero. A company doesn’t care if it’s rich. A profit tax will just evaporate into random R&D projects they spun up in the final quarter.
How about we simply get rid of billionaires?
Tax their revenue, they aren’t making profits
Tax them at 1000% it won’t make a difference.
The tax is applied to net, not gross profits. And wouldn’t you know it? No business ever makes any money.
Why would I want a to hold the bag by taking 50% stake in an overvalued bullshit company whose only IP is a trove of stolen data that they are using to exploit the working and creative classes?
Make no mistake, this AI shit is a bubble. The bubble of all bubbles perhaps.
I don’t think we want 50% stake, where things are going. This sounds like we’ll end up bailing them out one way or another…
Oh, we’ll likely do that anyway
Half as much as we deserve. Nationalize the fuckers, they’re pushing the IPO so they can fleece retail investors and then when the “market correction” (pump and dump) is over they’re going to try to get a bailout like the Banks did after 2008.
Could you imagine a country where everyone financially profits off the destruction of our shared society? Our water, forests, oceans, infrastructure, and much more just to get a buck. The critical thinkers see the backwards thought process behind the long term results of this I would guess. If this were to go the way tech wants, best case scenario we cover some ubi but the cost is everything we hold dear.
Or maybe somewhere in the middle where we as shareholders get to decide how these companies are run… But as we’ve all noticed by now… We as a collective society can’t be trusted with these types of decisions.
But you know Sam also can’t be trusted with both the power and money so what’s the best option to address this issue.
If it doesn’t mean we work less I don’t care.
And risk the liability when the AI bubble bursts? Microsoft trying to charge customers the actual costs of CoPilot are not going well.
AI companies need to pay for their emissions, subsidize power costs in communities affected by data cents, and just generally be made to shoulder the true costs of what they’re doing. When they pass this on to customers usage will plummet.
Bernie is wrong here.
He’s sheep dogging disenfranchised voters back into the party. That’s what sheep dogs do take commands from their handlers.
Yeah, I love Bernie and hate to lose him, but if he’s at all serious about this then I’m afraid he’s already gone.
Bernie’s been gone for about 15 years.
That would be a great way to fund a UBI.
Hardly. It costs more to run so-called AI (just seriously overbaked pattern matching, really) than it’ll ever make. The C-Suites are just going as hard as they can, hoping before they’re out of runway that they’ll be lucky enough to have the right subordinates to save their asses by stumbling across a way to make that not be true. In the meantime they’re skimming enough off the top to set themselves up for life while completely bleeding the rest of the company dry.
