According to YOU. What a very poor all or nothing statement. And the reader should never listen to someone who claims all or nothing here or there. Nope.
Perhaps throw a bridle on your unbridled "kindly fuck off nuance" view.
Couple questions .... what is the author's point of origin and experience with "democracy" and/or "democracies"? I mention this as the founding principals of this Lottery thing are more or less "complaints" and not values or principals really. It is very slasdash and hollow.
But this is a fun thought experiment so lets .... move on.
Why *exactly* is democracy the absolute best form of govt known to mankind?
You just kinda slip that in there which is a massive assumption.
And exactly which democracy is best aside from the one proposed?
For that matter exactly WHO? and I do mean WHO says that democracies aren't working? Who the fuck has the balls to say that horseshit premise?
No one is saying that. Not seriously, anywhere. No one.
That ultimately is the fatal flaw for this thought experiment.
There are fundamentally different value judgments from "European" "Democracies" vs US vs Asian as examples.
Lottery based is an interesting system but not really doable the way this site lays out.
3 years is too short to do anything; unless there is a relief value where a certain percentage (by lottery) of that year's cohort can do something critical in any representative form of govt. Incumbency.
You do in fact need a slowly revolving core of representatives who can do proper work over 2-5 terms max. Otherwise its a constant nut house with nothing getting done and not near enough permanence for medium to long term solutions over time.
At the end of the day for me -- I do not think the people behind this thought this through and it shows. There isnt serious skull sweat in this thing and I think it undermines an interesting concept. I also think just because you are frustrated in democratic processes -- you are the problem.
Apathy is a choice. Ignorance is a choice. Frustration is a choice.
If you do not like your form of govt -- move, make peace with it or roll up them sleeves and get busy participating.
this is the same drack which appears endlessly on Linkedin and bluesky and lil blogs.
Guess whatelse is pushed? the same drack in a Newsletter! Not interested and Hacker news is for so much better content than this horseshit.
This serves as a PSA to pirate more. Up 12 percent YoY from 2019.
They do not need a law to take a website to court. They can already do that. I need to find the lobbyist website which tracks how much $$$ is coming from Hollywood to DC.
This is exactly like a plot from Silicon Valley. OA's "middle-out compression" will revolutionize the world! I agree with hackernews Habosa's starkly simple comment. These people are up their own ass.
- Elon Musk founded OpenAI in 2015 with Sam Altman and Dario Amodei to develop artificial general intelligence (AGI) that would benefit humanity, not for-profit interests?
- OpenAI was established as a non-profit with the goal of open-sourcing its technology when possible?
- In 2020, OpenAI licensed its GPT-3 language model exclusively to Microsoft, going against its mission?
- By 2023, Microsoft researchers said GPT-4 demonstrated early signs of AGI capabilities. However, OpenAI did not make it openly available?
- In 2023, Sam Altman and Dario Amodei took actions that led to a change in OpenAI's board and direction towards profiting Microsoft over public benefit?
- The plaintiff alleges this violated the original agreement between Musk, Altman and Amodei to develop AGI for humanity's benefit as a non-profit?
- The plaintiff is seeking damages and to compel OpenAI to return to its original non-profit mission of developing safe and openly available AGI?
- Key concerns are that for-profit interests now influence whether OpenAI technology is deemed an AGI and how it is used?
- The change in direction away from the non-profit public interest mission damaged public trust in OpenAI?
- The suit alleges OpenAI's actions constitute unfair business practices under California law?
I guess we will see if these are answered. Personally, I do not trust Musk nor Altman. Approach them from a corner is what I am saying. OpenAI while their idiot savant in chatGPT is interesting. It is hardly worth paying for with such vast gulfs between good and useable answers and the usual terrible or lazy ones you get normally. While it is important to have a basic ruleset for AI, not when it comes to making it pre-k playground rules. No innovation can be truly had with such onerous and too polite rules today. Narrow AI indeed.
Well of course it is a power play or grab. But you what?
It is the same thing when I look for a sidegig or new day job and tell recruiters representing companies -- Remote only. Thanks, but no thanks for hybrid.