• sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    57 minutes ago

    Almost everyone in this thread seems to be assuming the US would pay for half the shares/equity of these companies.

    That is not what is being proposed.

    What is being proposed is that the US Govt simply seize half the shares/equity/board voting powers in these companies, without paying a cent for them.

    It is a half-nationalization.

    Not a half-bailout.

    • banshee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      55 minutes ago

      Good clarification. I’m convinced we will end up bailing them out anyway. We should nationalize and operate as a public good if generative AI is that important to society.

      • wewbull@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        They’re very much not. They have high valuations, but very few employees. Very different to the banks (where the public would lose money) and the car firms (who employed large numbers of workers)

          • wewbull@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 hour ago

            Pensions and other investments, yes.

            Not current accounts which was what was at risk in 2008. When the bank goes bust you don’t just lose money. You become unable to do anything financial, like get paid.

      • BananaIsABerry@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        49 minutes ago

        The point being, if the public owns half of the company but the company is failing, now the public has acquired 50% liability of a dying business.

        Like others said though, I’m sure taxpayers will be on the hook either way.

      • foxwolf@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Are you new here? The government will absolutely compensate the companies when the bubble bursts.

      • Furbag@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        They already are! The government signed exclusive military contracts with OpenAI to develop autonomous weapons. Half of these AI companies are being propped up with taxpayer dollars in the form of government contracts or subsidies, or the promise that there will be a taxpayer revenue stream coming their way in the near future.

    • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      48 minutes ago

      You didn’t read the article, or you didn’t understand it.

      The US Govt would not pay a cent for the shares of these companies.

      It would simply seize them, half-nationalize them.

      Its a half nationalization, not a half bailout.

    • Evil_Shrubbery@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Public stake isn’t for profits (especially not short term capital gains), it’s about concentration & not getting controlled.

      • HrabiaVulpes@europe.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Controlling something worthless is pointless anyway.

        And giving it away to everyone will score political points.

  • deliriousdreams@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    5 hours ago

    It would be a good idea if the entirety of the current industry for it wasn’t built entirely on smoke and mirrors type promises.

    The general idea (so far as I can parse) is that if these companies are expecting a government bailout when it all goes south, then the tax payers who would be bailing them out should get paid back. But in practice, what will happen is we’ll be saddled with the debt and these companies will weasel out of it.

    The fact is I don’t want to own a stake in any of these companies. I would rather they make it illegal for these companies to ask for a bailout from the government and close loopholes they will use to file for bankruptcy.

    If they’re going to fail the government should buy their assets (data centers, infrastructure, etc) if the people agree that’s okay. Instead of what will likely happen (the companies left standing when it all goes under will buy up all the assets dirt cheap).

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Idk I support bankruptcy for them, but I think it’s valuable to give mutual funds and pensions priority in restitution. Venture capital got themselves into this mess through irresponsible investment.

  • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Defense, oil, and media industries should be a higher percentage. They are historically responsible for most corrupt lobbying/disinformation/warmongering and alliance with zionazi rule over the US. The strategic unanimity of “must beat China or maintain zionazi bias over population control” for AI means that it is meant to be a corruption vector for skynet, funneling all of our wealth and liberty onto privatized profit from skynet.

  • RxBrad@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    4 hours ago

    AI is just a financial grift to circlejerk money out of the stock market; and then reap a big, fat government bailout when the bubble inevitably pops.

    If we share the profits, do we also share the risks? What happens to this plan when AI implodes?

  • Zizzy@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    9 hours ago

    First of all, fuck no. Remove all of the AI companies. Now. Secondly, this will guarantee they become “too big to fail”. Like, it feels as if they’re purposefully doing this to make it palatable to bail them out.

    • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 hour ago

      Wait.

      Remove?

      … How? From what?

      What does that even mean?

      … the point of this is to essentially half nationalize the companies.

      No public money would be used to purchase these assets / equity shares. The government would simply seize them.

      Is this a perfect solution? Fuck no.

      Is it significantly better than the public having 0 effective say in what huge megacorps do? The public bearing the socialized costs of profilgate profit maximization of AI companies, the gains all being funnelled upward toward the already wealthy to super to hyper to uber wealthy?

      Uh probably almost certainly yes.


      Specifically, Sanders proposes a one-time transfer of 50 percent of equity from companies like OpenAI, Anthropic, and xAI to the government. The idea: since AI is built on the accumulated knowledge, creativity, conversations, and labor of the American people — typically without permission or payment — the American people deserve a cut of the profits.

      This is not ‘public/government money buys out half the equity of AI companies’.

      This is ‘we are the government and we own half of you now, because we say so, fuck you’.

      The fund would acquire half the stock of the largest AI companies in the country through a mandated equity transfer — Sanders is explicit that this is not a profits tax. The government would then hold voting shares and receive equal board representation at each company, giving it formal power to block decisions deemed harmful to the public.

      It is literally ‘we own half your equity now, and have half the voting rights on your board(s)’.


      So basically that would be something like doing a stock split.

      In a standard stock split, private stock holders who used to own one share, now they own two shares of half the original share’s value. 2 * 1/2 = 1.

      But with this, this is more like the private stock owners… the split happens, they still own the one share, but its value has been halved, and now the US government owns the other share.

      2 * 1/2 = 1/2 {government/public} + 1/2 {private stock holders}

      Then, those stocks owned by the US government get put into essentially a new government organization that would manage those stocks snd finances, as a soveriegn wealth fund.

      The top of the K, the wealthiest 10% to 1% that own 90% or whatever of all stocks/equities… they all get a 50% haircut on their AI holdings.

      And the proceeds get put toward the people.

      Its not technically a wealth tax per se, but it accomplishes a similar thing, in a targeted and managed way.


      Anyone who thinks this is ‘the US government is gonna buy half the AI stocks’ is mistaken.

      That isn’t what is being proposed, ya’ll either didn’t read the article, or don’t know finance terminology.

      The latter I can at least understand, but I absolutely must explain and correct the mistake.

    • isekaihero@ani.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      6 hours ago

      I agree. No public funds should go to AI. No taxpayer money should be used to construct AI or datacenters. When the AI companies start to collapse, they should receive no bailouts.

      Bailouts are corruption. Why do the rich get socialism and the rest of us get crushing capitalism? When we fail, we get stepped on. When the rich fail, they get billion dollar bailouts? But they claim they deserve to keep all their riches because they worked hard for it?

      I could be a billionaire oligarch too if all of my failures were compensated for with billion dollar bailouts. It’s not hard to succeed when you are elevated to the heights of the gods every time you face a little adversity.

    • positiveWHAT@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      I think the intention is to get the profits of automation to the people when more jobs are inevitably automated.

      • jj4211@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        It is, but unintended consequences.

        With this, then we couldn’t afford Sam Altman to experience failure because he will drag folks down with him. So the companies invested become too big to fall, and the still private leadership gets to run things however they wish knowing the government will cover for any mistakes.

        It’s bad enough as the government will panic about retirement accounts when they falter, this exacerbates it.

        It’s a risky form of private-public partnership, with a lot of ways the company can privatize rewards but socialize the risk.

        • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          it actually creates symetry for risk/reward, but it does incentivize giving skynet contracts with argument that people get 50% of the proceeds from skynet abuse.

    • pHr34kY@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      8 hours ago

      This feels like a setup to the biggest rug-pull in history. The whole thing is going to shit and the taxpayers will be holding the bags.

      • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        48 minutes ago

        You didn’t read the article, or you didn’t understand it.

        The US Govt would not pay a cent for the shares of these companies.

        It would simply seize them, half-nationalize them.

        Its a half nationalization, not a half bailout.

      • moustachio@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 hours ago

        These AI companies rushing to do IPOs so the public’s retirement account index funds can buy them up and take the loss for them, too.

        These people need to suffer real consequences.

      • TronBronson@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Bruh they are working on deregulating debt swaps so they can hide how much leverage is going into these build outs. Trillions of dollars of data centers with mortgages and rent to own NVDA chips. its looking like the greatest scam of all time rn.

      • trolololol@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 hours ago

        I think it makes sense. The bill will be paid off from taxes, so it makes sense that the bailout comes with company stock transfer to workers.

        It’s fair for many reasons. One of them is that billionaires and corporations don’t pay taxes.

        What about, instead of 50%, make the bailed out company be 100% owned by the people - not the government, the people.

        • pHr34kY@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          7 hours ago

          By the time the public own it, it will be a liability, not an asset. I’ve seen my government purchase a telco’s entire infrastructure only to immediately write it off.

          Just set it on fire already.

          • TronBronson@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            6 hours ago

            yep lol and thats how it will work. we’ll get a bunch of data centers with a 5 year lifespan and 30 years of debt strapped to them.

    • MadameBisaster@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Always seeing these kinds of messages and kinda curious, I guess you mean LLMs with all AI and not truly all ai? Cause there are a lot more stuff under that umbrella term thats super useful for example in medicine etc

    • TronBronson@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      6 hours ago

      well said. The problem is they are overvalued anyway… so we take half of a trillion dollar company that only worth 30% of that number, so we take a big ass loss. unless we are just straight up taking half and there’s no compensation provided. can’t imagine the SRCOTUS riding with that policy.

  • borQue@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Oh fuck do we have censoring moderhaters here too now? I can stand up for my own opinion, asshole moderhaterfucktard

  • megopie@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 hours ago

    I don’t think these companies are worth the value of the paper that their charters are written on. I don’t think many of them are going to last much longer, but he might actually be on to something here in terms of diffusing a massive financial fraud that’s about to happen in broad daylight.

    The common wisdom right now is to just “put your money in an index fund, it’s safer and outperforms actively managed portfolios.” Which is to say, a fund that just buys a little bit of everything from a given list, rather than trying to pick stocks that someone thinks will do well, it creates a very diversified portfolio that is protected from anyone company fucking up by having the value spread over as many things as possible. Because many people just put their money in index funds now, getting listed in an index kind of guarantees that lots of people will be buying the shares consistently and thus consistently causing the price to rise over time.

    To get in to these lists, normally, a company has to have been public for a while, generally about a year, and show profitability for a prolonged time. These rules have recently been changed though.

    A bunch of the AI companies are doing initial public offerings (IPO meaning putting their shares on the public markets for the first time) in the next few months. And stating absolutely insane valuations. Because of the rule changes, they’re basically all getting immediately listed in index funds. And since they’re all targeting insane valuations, they’re going to automatically suck up a bunch of retirement money by default.

    I’m not sure about anthropic and openAI on this next part, but SpaceX (which just “bought” Xai), is only going public with about 5% of it’s shares, so theoretically they can just trickle more shares on to the market to get bought up by index funds, and because supply of actual shares is artificially constrained, it will lead to massive overvaluation of those shares, taking up a disproportionate amount of money going in to index funds.

    It’s actually fucking criminal that this is being allowed to happen, but because the rules for index funds and IPOs are set by financial institutions and stock exchanges, with very limited oversight by the government, they can just do this.

    If the government were to take these 50% shares, it would kind of throw a wrench in the plans, since it would give the government the ability to sell those shares on to the market and stop the over valuation that allows them to take disproportionately from the index funds.

  • SabinStargem@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 hours ago

    The public should own all of AI, and corporations should be forced to ask the public to lend compute. AI is a powerful tool, and if we give the elite ownership of it, they will someday cut society loose: By killing or enslaving us all, and using robots to autonomously fulfill the wealthy’s wish to be truly free of responsibility.

  • mycodesucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 hours ago

    When I found out what it meant when other countries have sovereign wealth funds…

    I have no idea how most people in America keep convincing themselves they’ve somehow got a good deal.

    • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      It’s mostly oil countries that have a sovereign wealth fund and it comes out of the oil money. Norway, Saudi Arabia. Idea being that oil is a limited resource with a lot of value and the proceeds should be used to ensure everyone’s future.

      Of course the US IS an oil country…