← Back to context

Comment by b00ty4breakfast

1 year ago

>...its purpose is to “prioritize safety and awareness through rapid human verification.

Oh look, a corporation refusing to take responsibility for literally anything. How passe.

The invention of the corporation is virtually to eliminate responsibility/culpability from any individual.

Human car crash? Human punishment. Corporate-owned car crash? A fine which reduces salaries some negligible percent.

  • Yes, corporations have all of the rights of a person, abilities beyond a person, yet few of the responsibilities of a person.

    • Our failure at "corporate alignment" makes it pretty clear that we're also going to fail at any version of "AI alignment"...

      1 reply →

    • They actually don't have all the rights of a person and they do have those same responsibilities.

      If this company was a sole proprietorship, the only recourse this kid would have is to sue the owner, up to bankruptcy.

      Since it's a corporation, his recourse is to sue the company, up to bankruptcy.

      As for corporations having rights, I can explain it further if necessary but the key understanding is that the singular of "corporations are people" is "a corporation is people" not "a corporation is a person".

      15 replies →

    • I remember reading a quote from someone to the effect of "I'll support corporate personhood after I see Texas execute a corporation". I'm definitely misremembering but you get the sentiment, haha

> a corporation refusing to take responsibility for literally anything. How passe

Versus all the natural people at the highest echelons of our political economic system valiantly taking responsibility for fuckall?

  • > Versus all the natural people

    We can at least hold them responsible.

    • > We can at least hold them responsible

      We don’t. (We can also hold corporations responsible. We seldom do.)

      The problem isn’t in the form of legal entity fraud and corruption wears.

      4 replies →

    • You can try, but you might be unknowingly holding their carefully designated scapegoat responsible instead.

  • I certainly didn't imply that to be the case and I'm not sure how you could draw that conclusion from 2 whole sentences.