5 comments

  • trilogic 1 minute ago
    Can´t read the article, why is this article still here? Is HN doing ads now, pfff?
  • velcrovan 14 minutes ago
    I can’t read the article. Do they explain how it’s more imperialist than what we have now?

    Using capital ownership to distribute the proceeds of an industry whose raw material was the creative output of everyone everywhere … seems like the neatest and most obvious possible solution to AI displacement and provenance. But I can see how it might make a few dozen people less likely to be billionaires.

    • StableAlkyne 6 minutes ago
      AI;DR* they want to build data centers in other countries that are less able to resist their construction. This consumes water and electricity of the host county. The central thesis is that if the less-than-willing exploitation of foreign resources for the enrichment of the more powerful country is imperialism, then this is a form of imperialism.

      * The clunky turns of phrase and jarring introduction of analogies reads strongly of Claude to me, at least

    • alephnerd 10 minutes ago
      Gift article - https://giftarticle.ft.com/giftarticle/actions/redeem/71bd10...

      But basically, the argument is that a government shouldn't accrue and own appreciating assets mixed with AI skepticism.

  • js73js8 7 minutes ago
    > A isn't X – it's Y
    • rtkwe 5 minutes ago
      It's common in AI writing because it's common in human writing. Juxtaposition is a useful rhetorical flourish.
  • alephnerd 19 minutes ago
    Well yeah, hard power is a major impetus behind sovereign wealth funds - be they ADIA, Temasek, Master Trust, QIA, PIF, CIC, etc.

    But this is the world we live in.

    If you put your head in the sand, you become the EU - squeezed by trade wars against China and the US with two large scale conventional wars within your near abroad.