bobbyfiend

100%. The mechanism is (I think) this: legally, there's nobody to prosecute or sue, now.

In the early 2000s some of us who were Way Too Online learned this lesson: A major pillar of internet security, a company whose entire reason for existing was to protect its customers' personal information, went bankrupt and sold all its customer data to the highest (or possibly just first) bidder.

No matter how "trustworthy" the company, no matter what their Terms and Conditions say, no matter how "solid" their "values," everyone sells your data when they go bankrupt.

(And most of them will do it long before then)

Does this mean kernels will be less stable? Big changes all at once seem to imply that, generally.

I donated regularly to Wikipedia and will again when they pull their heads out of their asses.

Oh, has he had a change of heart? A few months ago he was being dragged on mastodon for telling everyone to stop complaining about AI.

I think that is a reasonable take. It is s huge jump, in many ways, so I believe it is much more dangerous than other capitalist "innovations".

Reasonable take, but the last part ("faster-growing") is huge here. The sheer scale and multipliers on the bad things caused by AI are far beyond most (all?) previous technologies used by capitalists.

This, plus if we had any kind of political will or intelligence (as a nation; meaning the USA) we'd force AI companies to pay their extenalities: treat and sanitize every drop of water they use, and build the infrastructure to bring it back to communities; pay for their electrical infrastructure in advance and pay their electricity bills to the tune of "nobody else's bill goes up"; some kind of massive carbon capture tax for their use (this one might not be possible to actually do; it's too much); and of course paying royalties and copyright violation fines.

As at least one AI CEO has said, if they had to pay for all the laws they've broken and resources they've stolen, all AI companies currently existing would go out of business. let's say they didn't: The cost per token would be quite high, and very few people would use it.

It runs on theft and planet-scale destruction.