The way I interpret the philosophy of the minds is a bit different.
Some seem to conform to your analysis here, but many seem deeply compassionate toward the human condition. I always felt like part of what banks was saying was that, no matter the level of intelligence, humanity and morality had some deep truths that were hard to totally trancend. And that a humam perspective could be useful and maybe even insightful even in the face of vast unimaginable intelligence. Or maybe that wisdom was accessible to lower life forms than the minds.
I'd rather kill myself than pay Microsoft $41 a month for windows 11 - let alone windows 12, whatever amazing pile of shit that turns out to be - especially when it CANT respond in less than 100ms to anything. My god. At least it means someone will have to do something better.
The person writing this article is almost definitely part of the 1%. Who cares what gender the 62 richest people in the world are; these people cannot be the victims of inequality. What evidence is presented here that says "if rich people earnt less then poor people would earn more" which is the obvious inference. It is intuitive but is it true? If rich people pay more tax this doesn't get given to poor people as wages, so how does the tax question relate to the poverty issue? I agree that more tax revenue is good as it pays for better public services but there isn't any talk of 'wealth' provided by public services being part of the discussion.
I used to support a terminal services/citrix environment and we had repeated instances of people trying to copy and paste data and getting other peoples data. Never got anywhere investigating and boss refused to go to Microsoft. I'd forgotten about it till I read this.