Signtist

That’s not haywire. We already know AI makes stuff up and gets stuff wrong all the time. Putting it in an important position doesn’t make it any less likely to make mistakes - this was inevitable.

True. Think of how many you’d be able to inspect from up there!

…those are all corporations. Nationalization would make it a public service, rather than a corporate profit-driven service like how it is now.

You can bet that if libraries, for example, became privatized, we’d quickly see several different library companies pop up, each with their own paid book subscription service with exclusive partnerships with various popular authors, much like we have today with streaming platforms. Conversely, if we were to nationalize those streaming platforms, we’d likely see the service transformed to be more akin to our current library service.

It’s why the rightmost parties generally want to defund many public services and move them to the private sector - it transforms services that we spend money on to benefit the people into services that the people spend money on to benefit corporations.

Except in the US the moderate left generally chooses to cater to the right when they need to bolster their numbers, rather than the far left. It makes sense given that our current Democratic party is far closer to the moderate right than the far left. We’d need to elect new incoming lefter-leaning democratic leaders across all levels of government over the course of decades to get the party as a whole to tilt leftward rather than rightward when a clean majority is needed. It’s still the most viable option, but it’ll be a lot of work to achieve.

I wish the US had a system like that. It’s unfortunate that even a more inclusive voting system suffers from a surplus of voters fueled by hate and selfishness, but here in the US even protest votes for the far left play into the far right’s hands since all 3rd party votes together wouldn’t even come close to rivaling the 2 established parties.

To what extent do they have to talk about it, though? Can they address it, come to the conclusion that it’s infeasible (while subtly tucking millions of dollars from game companies into their pockets), and consider the matter settled? I understand that governments are meant to keep corporations in check to benefit the people, but functionally they keep the people in check to benefit corporations and their “lobbyists” (bribes).

I loved the original Rayman game so much as a kid that I’d specifically look for that old rainbow logo on other games to figure out which ones I might like.