Anytime a politician (or billionaire) begins a statement along the lines of "let me be clear" you can pretty much guarantee that the next thing they say is going to be a chest puffing lie.
To be fair, Mark Cuban is one of the first people who comes to mind when I think "artificial intelligence".
I'm sure they're trembling in their loafers AOC
"out and out brawl" god she's so full of shit
"Well see who's laughing when I send you a strongly worded letter and then make a post with me holding the letter looking weepy."
please let this "AI" bubble burst already. I'm so sick of it
I think they have been quietly bailing out the bubbles and crashes in real time already which is contributing to hyperinflation. They market it as a "soft landing" instesd of the inevitable full spectrum poopie which crashes reveal and thus the negative press and congressional hoopla of debating to bail this or that out. It just happens automatically. With what funds? Who knows. Just siphoning the value of the dollar out behind our backs.Auto-bail out
This wouldn't even be a bad idea if the auto bailouts were structured in a way to actually cool down the bubbles without popping them. Hell, they could literally set up a simple feedback control system to gently lower over inflated asset prices. I would less pissed at the bazinga shit if they actually used their gadgets to even try to accomplish what they claim to want to accomplish.
- Show
Panders as well, but at least doesn't imply he will do anything to fight for it. (and khan is one of two redeemable things about biden)
Nooooo america needs the biggest best treat printers.
By the way, i work in AI and i can tell you that, under the current structure, we wont be the leader in AI anyway. These companies are managed about as well as your local Subway sandwich shop
literally no capitalist industry is going to outcompete China in anything anymore in because they literally can not afford to in the vagaries of the market as private monopolist entities beholden to the interests they are; Most major companies based in the US been inflating their own value for their shareholders and investors with things like stock buyback book padding for 2 decades (and tech companies are among the worst offenders --- them and airline companies, but it's universal with capitalist corporations); which is all value not reinvested as productive or RND capital, meaning not tied to any metric of productivity or growth or improvement in anything, spelling nothingness in the long term for the capitalist, and in all terms for the (ever-growing and ever-poorer with no expansion of industry from reinvestment) working class. That these capitalists aren't reckoning with that, I take great glee in. Because it is their end.
It is, but unfortunately the current crop of elder investors have gotten more than enough to live their last 20 years lavishly in air conditioned compounds, while the rest of us burn and starve
Yes but the poor masses of people do not remain placidly outside of those air conditioned compounds for very long when they are truly burning and starving. It doesn't matter who or what is stationed with what lethal force to guard them against the writhing masses of angry and desperation-crazed humanity. This is what revolutions are made of.
No matter how likely lethal the jump from a burning building is, the flames lapping at the jumpers' backs is considered a much more guaranteed and painful fate. Only in this case, the circumstances become reversed; and the masses realize (and it is the job of the communists to show them) that the jump isn't any less lethal or painful --- because what was perceived as an unstoppable force-of-nature-inferno dispassionately pushing them off the brink are actually a relative handful of... people. Soft people. Cowards and liars making conscious decisions for selfish reasons. The "fires" pushing them out the window have faces, and names, and bleed just the same as any commoner. This perspective shift, is class consciousness reaching its revolutionary apex.
The fundamental law of revolution, which has been confirmed by all revolutions and especially by all three Russian revolutions in the twentieth century, is as follows: for a revolution to take place it is not enough for the exploited and oppressed masses to realise the impossibility of living in the old way, and demand changes; for a revolution to take place it is essential that the exploiters should not be able to live and rule in the old way. It is only when the “lower classes” do not want to live in the old way and the “upper classes” cannot carry on in the old way that the revolution can triumph. This truth can be expressed in other words: revolution is impossible without a nation-wide crisis (affecting both the exploited and the exploiters). It follows that, for a revolution to take place, it is essential, first, that a majority of the workers (or at least a majority of the class-conscious, thinking, and politically active workers) should fully realise that revolution is necessary, and that they should be prepared to die for it; second, that the ruling classes should be going through a governmental crisis, which draws even the most backward masses into politics (symptomatic of any genuine revolution is a rapid, tenfold and even hundredfold increase in the size of the working and oppressed masses—hitherto apathetic—who are capable of waging the political struggle), weakens the government, and makes it possible for the revolutionaries to rapidly overthrow it.
"She proves this admin fights for working people. It would be terrible leadership to remove her."
"She acts as a Potemkin symbol that we can point to in order to feign to the peasants in the electorate, upon which we rely for a mandate to power, that we don't work solely for the big banks and for the arms dealers and the tech monopolies and the other capitalist-neo-colonialists who finance us and make up and/or outright choose our own cabinet members, and getting rid of her would undermine that."God damn, I wish this prick would just shut up. Is anyone buying the "radical lefty" act anymore?
Have Khan and FTC done anything of note? Not being snide. But big oligopolies remain big. Maybe they stopped them from concentrating capital even more?
I can't stand Biden for so many different reasons, but one of the few good things he's done is putting her in to lead the FTC.
A few hits:
- Launching a study on surveillance pricing (corporations are using your data to sell you something at one price, but your neighbor the same product at another price)
- Sued to block the merger of Kroger-Albertsons (which would reduce competition and raise grocery prices)
- Attempted to block the merger of Microsoft with Activision (pretty sure the FTC lawsuit lost, but is under appeal)
- Investigating Microsoft on anti-trust grounds
- Banned non-compete clauses from employee contracts
That last one got fucked up by a right wing judge in Texas, but I want to point out that the FTC issued the non-compete ban based on existing rulemaking authority.
Khan is very aware of anti-trust rules that are on the books, but haven't been applied in the neoliberal era. She is the first FTC chair in decades to start applying them.
That is why so many billionaires are publicly calling for her to be fired.
Again, I think Biden is awful, but Khan as FTC chair is a very good thing.
If you want to read more about her record, check out The American Prospect. David Dayen is a journalist that writes about monopolies pretty heavily, he is a huge fan of what Khan is doing.
Stopped some mergers, doing google anti trust rn (which would be pog if it weren't so late), did some stuff around insulin, but i got so confused with campaign rhetoric if its blanket or medicaid/medicare only price drop
you can excuse genocide
link
