Why do AI stocks rely on corrupt assholes being in charge?

Seems like a moment for "are we the baddies?" style reflection.

throwaw12 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> Why do AI stocks rely on corrupt assholes being in charge?

Isn't this true about whole US politics, where lobby groups fund elections, so that politician later returns a favor to them?

To make their (lobby groups) job easier, this election theatre has only 2 actors to pick from, imagine how expensive would be if you always had 8-9 real contenders and media didn't control the narrative

▲

liotier an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The USA's AI companies have embraced regulatory failure as a shortcut to accelerate physical deployments.

Using onsite fossil fuel electricity generation as primary power source, instead of waiting for the grid to catch up (preferably a decarbonized grid), depends on corrupt assholes being in charge.

▲

master-lincoln an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Isn't the whole stock market mostly selfish assholes investing into other greedy assholes?

▲

lakeviewterrace an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Imagine unironically believing this indicates a windfall of ethics to come.

This is where third-worlders have absolutely no illusions. They know how the system works.

▲

piker an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

That's a motivated take. Obviously the party and candidates which promote less regulation are preferable to the stock market. It doesn't require accusations of corruption, and it doesn't mean their opponents are wrong, either.

▲

alweirilawerj an hour ago | parent | next [-]

You have a very shallow understanding of economics. "Less regulation" is great if you can't think beyond next quarter. "Good regulation" is what keeps the economy healthy long-term.

	▲	piker an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Perhaps, but that's not really relevant as I am not the stock market.

▲

thrance an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Republicans are not the party of "less regulation". That's another of these myths they use like "states rights" or "fiscal responsibility".

▲

piker an hour ago | parent [-]

Ok members of one party are proposing rent controls, city-owned groceries, abolition of AI advancement, expansion of the EPA, etc. and the other is revoking long-standing SEC, EPA and other agency regulations. This claim just doesn't hold up.

(I'm a swing voter if that helps.)

▲

applebottomjean an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Which party created the EPA?

	▲	piker 44 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I don't know the history. Nixon? Seems like it was motivated in the 1950s. I don't think Richard Nixon was on the ballot this year, but maybe I just missed it.

▲

thrance 36 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Tariffs?

	▲	piker 22 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Totally disappointing from a citizen (and market?) perspective, but I think you're stretching the meaning of "regulation" to try to squeeze tariffs in. That's like saying war is "regulating" the other country.

▲

deaux an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Abortion bans, book bans, trans bans, voter ID laws and so forth are regulation. It's "regulation for thee but not for me".

▲

piker an hour ago | parent [-]

That's a fair observation, and perhaps requires qualifying my initial point with "non-social" regulation. The market doesn't care about those.

▲

deaux 39 minutes ago | parent [-]

Cannabis stocks certainly care about their anti-cannabis regulation.

You know why I can play this game all day? Because the base premise doesn't hold.

	▲	piker 29 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Sure, also all the gambling/prediction markets, abortion-adjacent stocks etc. could potentially be down. In terms of the market, though, those industries just don't matter. The lion's share of the economy (energy, finance, technology, tobacco, firearms) benefit from the election of a party that is hostile to their regulation. It's not really debatable. What is debatable is whether that's correct or good, since deregulation allows those organizations to potentially externalize costs to the environment, society, etc.