1604
submitted 3 weeks ago by tfm@europe.pub to c/workreform@lemmy.world
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] AcidiclyBasicGlitch@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

The existence of an "AI race" between China and the U.S., where government contracted billionaires in both countries insist that citizens accepting authoritarian surveillance, is just a patriotic duty necessary to win that race, is a policy failure.

Especially when investigative journalism uncovers in 2025 that the U.S./Silicon Valley sold China the mass surveillance system that has allegedly given them such an upper hand in this imaginary race.

2019: Trump CTO Addresses AI, Facial Recognition, Immigration, Tech Infrastructure, and More

Q:"Maintaining U.S. leadership in AI might have costs in terms of individuals and society. What costs should individuals and society bear to maintain leadership?”

A:“I don’t view the world that way. Our companies big and small do not hesitate to talk about the values that underpin their technology. [That is] markedly different from the way our adversaries think. The alternatives are so dire [that we] need to push efforts to bake the values that we hold dear into this technology.”...“A patchwork of regulation of technology is not beneficial for the country. We want to avoid that. Facial recognition has important roles—for example, finding lost or displaced children. There are use cases, but they need to be underpinned by values.”

The baked in "values" of the men telling you not to worry about regulations:

2025: Silicon Valley enabled brutal mass detention and surveillance in China, internal documents show

2025: Palantir CEO Says a Surveillance State Is Preferable to China Winning the AI Race

2025: Palantir CEO slams ‘parasitic’ critics calling the tech a surveillance tool: ‘Not only is patriotism right, patriotism will make you rich’

[-] dreary8154@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 weeks ago

Jesus all commies.

Now you guys have a problem with innovation.

[-] prole 2 points 3 weeks ago

Can you explain to me, in your own words, what you believe a "commie" is?

[-] dreary8154@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 weeks ago

Belief that government can do better or some rich people innovating is a bad thing.

[-] prole 2 points 2 weeks ago

Right. Try reading a book.

[-] dreary8154@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 weeks ago
[-] prole 2 points 2 weeks ago
[-] dreary8154@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 weeks ago
[-] balsoft@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 weeks ago

Leftists are the first to laud innovation when it benefits regular people. This is just a dick measuring contest by some asshats, financed by stealing billions of dollars from their workers.

[-] masterspace@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

You do realize that NASA has a fixed budget for the science missions they can run right? Amd you do realize that when the launch costs for their satellites are 50x lower, that means they can run more science missions more often?

We all hate Musk, but it's fucking insane to look at the equivalent of the first airplane company that could land a plane and didn't just destroy it after every flight, and say 'thats just a dick measuring contest, how could that be useful?'

[-] balsoft@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Capitalism can create innovation, but capitalism is not necessary for it. The very same innovation could have happened if the state spent a fraction of this money on R&D, without all the insane Terraform Mars T-shirts and 3 companies wasting resources to do pretty much exactly the same thing three times. Sadly the american government is not an effective redistributor of wealth, and any NASA budget comes with a million (dumb) strings attached, like spending it on certain projects that benefit the state senator who voted for it.

Also, I don't know where you get that 50x number, SpaceX lowered the launch cost maybe by about 3-4x compared to contemporary chinese rockets.

[-] masterspace@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 weeks ago

Capitalism can create innovation, but capitalism is not necessary for it. The very same innovation could have happened if the state spent a fraction of this money on R&D, without all the insane Terraform Mars T-shirts and 3 companies wasting resources to do pretty much exactly the same thing three times. Sadly the american government is not an effective redistributor of wealth, and any NASA budget comes with a million (dumb) strings attached, like spending it on certain projects that benefit the state senator who voted for it.

In this situation, the state LITERALLY spent more money developing the SLS rocket, and it is going to be a colossal failure and waste of money compared to the rockets that can be reused.

Three companies trying to produce the same thing is not a waste, it's literally the defining feature of capitalism and why every government, including the Chinese Communist government, still uses capitalist systems. Multiple entities competing to do the same thing gives you more variety and diversity, and hedges your bets in case one of them is wrong or corrupted by flawed people in it.

Also, I don't know where you get that 50x number, SpaceX lowered the launch cost maybe by about 3-4x compared to contemporary chinese rockets.

Compared to SLS, the literal state funded alternative.

[-] dreary8154@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 weeks ago

Your a scholar.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Bazell@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I am not in a theme, but what bad in having them moving the progress by doing the space race? Maybe they are jerks, but they try to do something. Or, at least, pretend to. Can someone explain why there is so much hate towards them?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 weeks ago

I agree, but they're not giving enough credit to human greed and megalomania. It should be at least 50/50.

[-] FreddiesLantern@leminal.space 1 points 2 weeks ago

Time to bring out the soluti-honhonhon.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›
this post was submitted on 15 Nov 2025
1604 points (100.0% liked)

Work Reform

14350 readers
23 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS