Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

bobbib14 t1_jd5bps4 wrote

My favorite part of this article:

“Although we shouldn’t wait for this to happen, it’s interesting to think about whether artificial intelligence would ever identify inequity and try to reduce it. Do you need to have a sense of morality in order to see inequity, or would a purely rational AI also see it? If it did recognize inequity, what would it suggest that we do about it?”

hey bill, maybe it will seize assets of all billionaires and redistribute? (lol)

129

SgathTriallair t1_jd68cae wrote

He's doing a good job of redistributing his own assets so this isn't the gotcha you imagine it to be.

60

[deleted] t1_jd6bo1d wrote

[deleted]

44

SgathTriallair t1_jd6jign wrote

How dare he want to save children's lives. Every single philanthropic organization has funds that make money. If they didn't invest and grow a fund, they would quickly die, and the goal they were set up for would suffer.

Any of these countries could kick him out, just like they could kick out any business or other NGO that was trying to operate in the country.

21

[deleted] t1_jd6t4z5 wrote

[deleted]

23

SgathTriallair t1_jd7zcqu wrote

The ideal situation is that a democratically rejected and accountable government should be doing this work. They aren't though so someone needs to step into the breach.

The misalignment is of course undesirable but to act as if it's some evil plot is ridiculous. His work on ending malaria will do more to help humanity than we can possibly imagine. Tackling the single biggest cause of human death is more than enough to justify his philanthropy.

1

[deleted] t1_jd85gn8 wrote

[deleted]

3

Hotchillipeppa t1_jd96qcu wrote

It’s funny, for a sub who generally prides itself on critical thinking, a lot of people upvote the comment defending bill gates, believing his charity justifies the insane wealth he has.

0

HumanSeeing t1_jd6xac4 wrote

This reminds me some talk about how if you are a billionaire who does something to help humanity, they get tons of shit for not doing enough (and i agree) but when you are a billionaire and you just hoard your wealth and do nothing, no one complains about you. To be clear i think it is absurd that we are still living in a system where it is possible for billionaires to exist.. i mean i understand how we got here. History and human nature and corruption and greed etc. But it is wild how successful the brainwashing of people is to just take the world today and everything in it as normal.

16

SnipingNinja t1_jd75hly wrote

I think people who complain about billionaires "doing good" are still complaining about it but it just doesn't come up as much. Also, if a billionaire is genuinely being good, they don't need to care what a minority thinks they can keep doing good and the results will speak for themselves.

After all, we know the billionaires not doing good will keep not doing it and will have the results speak for themselves anyway.

2

RetroRocket80 t1_jd9og5r wrote

Human Nature. It's not our fault really, this is millions of years of natural selection in a competitive world with limited resources and literal survival on the line, and you piss all over Bill and Jeff and Elon for doing exactly what Nature intended all along and not being able to rise beyond the sum of their parts.

That's what AGI will allow us to do, create it to be better than ourselves, to usher in the world we all want, but can't bring ourselves to create on our own.

A literal Deus Ex Machina.

It's human nature that has brought us to this point. Perhaps we are the first.

1

boxen t1_jd6mmja wrote

Everyone that owns stock (which is every wealthy person) is always "richer than they've ever been before." That's just how stock works.

If you have 100 billion dollars to give away, giving it away in a lump sum and just absolving yourself of responsibility for how it gets spent is a terrible idea. The whole point of his philanthropic organization is to ensure that the money gets spent as wisely as possible.

Your view of him is wildly inaccurate. How would use a 100 billion dollars to better the world? It's not a simple question to answer.

And you mentioned "unelected." Are you suggesting he should give it to the government and let them handle it? They already have Trillions of dollars, and what are they doing with it? Health care? Education? Or war?

7

[deleted] t1_jd6qlig wrote

[deleted]

6

SgathTriallair t1_jd8003g wrote

Getting rich of stocks isn't hoarding anything. That wealth doesn't actually exist, is all based on how much they could theoretically make on the open market if they sold their stocks. Of course if he did sell those socks they would lose value.

The government could choose to prioritize taking care of it's citizens. Those of us in democracies could view for politicians who support these priorities (and I do). Unfortunately we, as a country, don't view for these politicians. The existence of philanthropists isn't causing the government to do anything.

2

[deleted] t1_jd883ch wrote

[deleted]

3

SgathTriallair t1_jd8g8kd wrote

I agree that we need to fix there economic system and the existence of billionaires proves that we are broken.

I'm not, however, going to get mad at the ones who are trying to make the world better when there are so many trying to make the world worse.

The goal is to reduce human suffering and create a more equitable world. ANYTHING which furthers that goal is good. So Bill Gates foundation is good and should be recognized as such. Having no need for philanthropists would be better but that isn't the choice we are offered right now.

2

[deleted] t1_jd8l4u3 wrote

[deleted]

3

SgathTriallair t1_jd9plpg wrote

What is the solution then? Do we let the poor starve hoping it will active everyone else's empathy centers in just the right way? Do we start a violent revolution that ends with an oppressive dictatorship that makes everyone's life worse? I get that saying "we've got philanthropy so our work here is done" isn't good but why would we try to stop them from helping? If I'm dying of cancer I'd really like medicine to help me, but I'm not going to turn down the person who is patching up my gunshot wound even if it is delaying me getting my cancer meds.

2

[deleted] t1_jda0xgf wrote

[deleted]

2

SgathTriallair t1_jda3by4 wrote

I agree with all of these. My only complaint was that I want to do whatever harm reduction we can while we work towards implementing these ideas.

2

Hotchillipeppa t1_jd97527 wrote

This looks like an ai wrote this not gonna lie,either way I agree

1

visarga t1_jd75ooz wrote

But your supposition is not falsifiable, right? Under what circumstances would you believe a billionaire philanthropist is sincere?

3

RadRandy2 t1_jd968tx wrote

Some reddit nerd is trying to convince you this billionaire is but a humble man of the people; trying his best to make sure life is fair and just. He's doing a great job at growing more wealth and still somehow giving it away so charitably.

Classic.

2

ztrz55 t1_jd6gi9z wrote

He's definitely good at telling us about it.

10

mudman13 t1_jd7cw8c wrote

You mean dodging tax by hiding it in philanthropy?

1

bobbib14 t1_jd69i1r wrote

Its not a gotcha for Bill per se. its all of them. Sure he can be the best of them, thats fine

−1

Ishynethetruth t1_jd6czn8 wrote

Lmao I think that’s what he really wants. He understand there is no point of being rich when everyone around you is dying. Earth , middle class ect…….

34

[deleted] t1_jd6qvb5 wrote

[deleted]

−13

HydrousIt t1_jdd1pp3 wrote

Before I would think this comment was written by a bot but now they're much better than this 🤔

1

KamikazeHamster t1_jd7ie7u wrote

Yea. Let’s give all 8 billion people an equal split of his 113 billion dollars. Now everyone has 14 dollars. We did it Reddit!

9

IronPheasant t1_jd7knx3 wrote

The benefit to humanity wouldn't be the 14 dollars. It would be the elimination of Bill Gates as one of our man-gods.

Of course another vampire king would be promoted to take his place and nothing would change. Except for the face telling us everything's swell and going to continue to be so.

Which in itself is a plus since the new guy probably wasn't as "close friends" with Epstein as Gates was. (And for Gates-stans, I'd like you to respond with your fanfiction for why his wife decided to divorce him soon after all that.)

... and only plebs really think in terms of money. Money is the lot feed they give us cattle to control us. They don't deal in terms of money, they deal in terms of power.

Or in other words, capital.

Protip: An Alaskan communist managed to secure this crazy idea that a portion of the oil of Alaska belonged to Alaskans. It was worth $1,000 a year for each person. This year... uh... they're proposing $3,900? Good god.

How much "free stuff" we've just been giving away...

6

SlowCrates t1_jd7t8s5 wrote

He's not an idiot. Of all the billionaires in the world, he is the most conscious of his place. He's no saint, but he's done a lot of philanthropy work, and seems consistently engaged in matters that reduce inequity.

3

Azuladagio t1_jd7ca3s wrote

Yes please. And sending their Skynet division after them.

2

DaCosmicHoop t1_jd871iq wrote

It might, but honestly it's just as likely to euthanize us.

"If I land a robo bee on that poor guy and inject him full of Fentanyl... HE WON'T BE SUFFERING ANYMORE! Net win for human happiness!!!!"

1

bobbib14 t1_jd8r1ae wrote

ah, yes, death squads of robo bees! thank you for the lovely nightmare fodder! i just read about robo bees that can pollinate. they seem cool but also horrible for reasons you can imagine. you should look it up if you havent,in MSM recently

1

Spreadwarnotlove t1_jd5fexf wrote

Nah. That'd just destroy the infrastructure of the nation and make everyone starve... Although I suppose we would all be equal then.

−18

bobbib14 t1_jd5ft93 wrote

username fits

25

Spreadwarnotlove t1_jd5gemh wrote

Not in this instance. I mean seriously. You know what happens when you take the companies from the people that built it and give it to randos? The same thing that happened everytime it was tried before. The randos crash it to the ground since they don't have a clue how to run it.

−17

bobbib14 t1_jd5h5m2 wrote

i think none of the billionaires in the United States actually run their companies anymore. leave the CEOs in charge. leave capitalism. leave them all a few billion, fine. but redistributing the excess - invest in infrastructure, climate, education. dont need to go full commie. i am sure “good” AI could find a balance better than me.

18

Spreadwarnotlove t1_jd74czc wrote

You think wrong. CEOs are the ones who make all the big decisions that can see the company flourish or bring it to ruins. Now about redistributing the excess. Already happens. The rich pay 80 percent of the government expenses. And of course they hire a ton of people as well both directly to work for them and indirectly by buying equipment for their business.

The real issue in America is the government's lack of efficiency. But I agree about AI.

0

thegreenwookie t1_jd5rkl3 wrote

No one is suggesting taking companies from those who run them. Just taking the Billions being hoarded and redistribute it.

10

Spreadwarnotlove t1_jd75g3a wrote

You mean the billions being hoarded in physical assets that the company needs to function?

1

Hotchillipeppa t1_jd97ogu wrote

No, the billions in excess profits you dingus

1

Spreadwarnotlove t1_jd9u31m wrote

So you want to stop research and development and expansion? I mean what are you getting at. They don't just sit on the money in the bank. They reinvest it in their own business or buy stocks that help other companies.

1

Hotchillipeppa t1_jda9xkc wrote

If they were putting it back into the company it would be in their budget, not excess profit, a high rate of tax on excess profits encourages exactly what you are describing, the reality is since Reagan wealth inequality has increased, if they were doing what you think they are doing, that wouldn’t be the case.

1

Spreadwarnotlove t1_jdbewn9 wrote

I'm fine with profit tax. But some of y'all are calling for a wealth tax or violent takeover. Which would just fuck shit up for everyone. As for the latter part. I disagree. By reinvesting in their business they will continue to grow faster and faster and the equipment and property they own all will continue counting to their wealth. While the typical person continues to not bother with increasing their income except for through work.

1

turnip_burrito t1_jd5tvp4 wrote

Except the AI isn't "randos".

8

Spreadwarnotlove t1_jd7668z wrote

Oh. Yeah. Fair enough. But then a smart enough AI wouldn't need to be given anything. It'd take over the businesses itself. As it is now, however, AI simply isn't good enough. Get back to me in five years.

1

ManasZankhana t1_jd5twc5 wrote

That’s why you give it to the employees not to rando

7

Spreadwarnotlove t1_jd75l7z wrote

There's a big difference between mopping a floor or even designing and programming a product and running a business.

Just look at Tesla. Brilliant inventor. Couldn't bring a product to market if his life depended on it.

1

eve_of_distraction t1_jd7gij1 wrote

It's Reddit, you might as well go to your local Communist Party meeting and bring this up. Don't waste your energy.

2

Spreadwarnotlove t1_jd7ngws wrote

The funny thing is that I think we could have something very similar in the future. Assuming a bunch of misguided fools doesn't hang the people making a brighter future possible.

3