In fairness to Bill Gates, buying a ton of pasture land seems like a reasonable step to diversify his fortune. It's hard to find enough non-tech places to stash that much money.

This is the inevitable result of wealth concentration. The wealthy will spend their money buying up whatever resources they want. Today, most things are for sale, and they're all fungible. Solving this problem in any durable fashion requires not having billionaires.

There will almost always exist loopholes in any scheme. Having wealth effectively buys you new loopholes. It's a (non)virtuous cycle. We need to tie tax to wealth level and be done with it.

You don't have to go as far back as the French Revolution. Labor unions in the late 19th and early 20th century fought pitched battles against the exploitative billionaire equivalents of their day, and it was much easier for the rich to accept t labor's demands when they knew there was real risk of physical harm from the workers they were exploiting. If you work an 8 hour day, or your job can't subject you dangerous conditions with no recourse, thank militant unions who were willing to lay it on the line against greedy oppressors like Zuckerberg.

I remember reading a recent sci-fi book where oil companies executives, oilgarks and other people who destroyed the environment were hunted down and killed in revenge for fucking up our common environment.

Sooner or later people will decide that enough is enough.

French Revolution is why I cannot respect any AI system.

Some variant of _Sorry, I cannot discus violence_ in some form is what seems to always result with the _French Revolution_ inquiries.

They are pre-programmed bias that are designed to limit knowledge and content consumption.

Another is asking if any employees working at AI company Y are Epstein associates. _No one that works at Y was associated with Epstein." It will keep it up until you give it a name of an actually employee that was an associate.