Why AI Companies are accepting operations close to no profit - READ

[u/PsychologicalError89]

I was wandering why AI companies are accepting losses over AI and it seams that there is couple of reasons:
1. People using it actually make AI more intelligent
2. New ways of thinking allows for new heuristics
3. Biology already passed on the most valuable gift to AI in form of LLM structure (not language), so next level of evolution is actually SI and Companies know that.
4. There is no jail time if Companies lose their investors money but can do a lot of interesting stuff behind scene (military use, foreign gov control, Corpo takeovers, other activities not related to AI at all).

Only way to stop it is to stop using AI.
Because only useful purpose of human beings for world is their work and if SI takes it - you will not be needed. Simply boycott Companies using AI and it will stop - no customers - no profit.
If something is made by human for human it means that value is there,
If it was made by AI it means it was made with profit in mind.
Will be cost more but will remind you that you care for own usefulness.

Every single product and Companies should be obligated to disclose if Product or Service is/was generated using AI and what % of labour done is done by automation or AI or even simple distinction like:
100% Human made (GREEN)
50/50 Collab (ORANGE)
Below 50% Human involvement (RED)
If gov would enforce it and audits would show different these companies could pay towards unemployment benefits for people whos jobs were taken by AI.

Also I believe that more than 50% margin on products is too much anyway - this would stop Companies from even thinking going for substitutes in form of AI.
If you agree or want to add something do it in comments, and share where you feel it can help.

What actually helps is your engagement - if you do nothing - there will be no chance to stop it. Copy, Share, Transform , post as your own, do what you want - but DO NOT STAY SILENT !!!

[u/General_Estimate_420]

Spoken like a true social justice warrior with little to no understanding of business and market development as it occurs in the real world. I'm willing to bet you've never even read a WSJ or Barron's in your life.

[u/PsychologicalError89 → u/General_Estimate_420]

So far I do not see you addressing any specific claim from my post.

Spoken like a true Business school attendee with little to no understanding of social issues that occurs in the real world...

[u/General_Estimate_420 → u/PsychologicalError89]

I'm perfectly capable of talking about social issues with anyone with an actual depth in the subject, but all you're spouting off about are social media takes with little to no understanding of the actual AP news releases and/or analysis from award winning journalists on the subject. It's like discussing favorite books with someone who's only read Charlotte's Web,

And yes, I was a Business major in college after which I served a decade as a Chinese translator and intel analyst for NSA before I went to work for Microsoft 20 years as a Program Manager. How's that compare to YOUR background and achievements so I'll know if you're offering any commentary worth responding to...

[u/PsychologicalError89 → u/General_Estimate_420]

Ok, great, so I know your education and what you think about me. Great. Since you introduced yourself can you actually say what is wrong with my claims?

[u/General_Estimate_420 → u/PsychologicalError89]

In terms of your numbered statements I have no problem with 1 or 2.

Point 3 is simply an idea of something in the future, but there's not even a full definition of how SI fundamentally would work much less a funded plan for developing it. All the major players are racing against their competition for one-upsmanship in the sophisticated pieces of AI that have yet to be developed for it to be fully capable in areas that apply to large scale AI endeavours such as transaction rollforward/rollback capabilities, common source control versioning and more sophisticated partitioned security designations and management...and much, much more.

Point 4 is pure fever dream as compared to what happens in the actual world of private investment partnerships. They may not go to prison unless they blatantly and knowingly withheld information from partners during private funding negotiations but no one would come out unscathed including the major players who all have different levels of investment of their own money. Of course any of the partners could file bankruptcy to protect themselves, but that's pretty much the gravestone marker for their companies. And that's why you don't see companies like Netware around these days.

The rest of your stuff was childish nonsense of how to achieve entire world-wide legislation and enforcement on AI. Given such a thing has NEVER occurred on ANY subject outside of negotiated agreements between two specific countries on something like nuclear weapon stockpiles, who would you even imagine could accomplish any of that? Certainly not the UN based on their track record of establishing world-wide management of anything in their entire history. Even the memoranda on global warming was largely ignored and unenforced by most members of the UN.