Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

AsheyDS t1_j1zkqqd wrote

Reply to comment by dracount in Concerns about the near future and the current gatekeepers of AI by dracount

>Because they have shareholders best interests at heart. With such power, society should come first, not shareholders.

That's not always the case. It depends on the structure of the company. However, even if it isn't shareholders, say it was funded by crowdsourcing... AI devs are still beholden to those that donated, one way or another. Unfortunately, it can't be developed in a financial vacuum. That said, even if there are financial obligations, that doesn't mean AI devs are passively following orders either. Many are altruistic to varying degrees, and I doubt anyone is making an AGI just to make money or have power. Shareholders perhaps, but not the people actually making it.

I guess if it's a big concern for you, you should try looking for AI/AGI startups that don't have shareholders, determine their motives, and if you agree with their goals then donate to them directly.

2

SteppenAxolotl t1_j208evq wrote

It doesn't matter who controls it, they're afraid the future will look like the present and the past.

The structure of all political economies tend to produce certain results. A system that wants to survive wont permit situations that will allow people to not participate en mass. Most people on this sub wants their own pet AGI that will allow them the agency to materially survive without depending on anyone else. They want to free themselves of the one thing society exists to provide, society evaporates when that dependency is broken.

0