The problem is that value is derived from property rather than from work. You earn substantially more by owning a machine than by operating that machine, which rewards people who have money more than people who have skills.

[–] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Yes but their is not real answer to that. Even comunism where people own the means of production. Turns into a state where the leaders of that state make more money owning the machines then the workers on those machines.

Any system will always result in a cost to start the industry be it land in the past. Machines in the present or AI in the future. Those who have the resources to provide work for others will always have some form of power. And power will always lead to corruption.

All differing political stratagies do is change the process for gaining that power.

[–] nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 year ago

Humanity would probably have to eliminate psycho/sociopathic behavior. Something like 1% of humanity (much higher rate in billionaire and CEO populations, like 25%+).

Like you said, designing a system that prevents them from taking control without pretty draconian measures that are likely to catch many false positives (and still be evaded by skilled psycho/sociopaths) seems pretty difficult.

Maybe AI will be able to filter them out of the population, but that’s full of moral and ethical pitfalls too.

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml -3 points 1 year ago

Turns into a state where the leaders of that state make more money owning the machines then the workers on those machines.

Except not really. Corruption is a problem but corruption happens in bourgeois democracy too, the overwhelmingly main source of wealth extraction that we can eliminate is surplus labor value extraction brought about by property relations. State socialism cuts away a massive problem while still retaining smaller ones.