• @Ajen
    link
    0
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    And the main point I was trying to make, which obviously got muddied by my misguided humor, is that we (in the US, at least) already classify corporations as “people,” which is something I strongly disagree with.

    I refuse to respect corporations like I respect human beings, and I don’t think they deserve human rights or the influence they have over our government.

    • FfaerieOxide
      link
      fedilink
      23 months ago

      I refuse to respect corporations like I respect human beings, and I don’t think they deserve human rights or the influence they have over our government.

      I don’t think corporations are people either. You and I agree on that.

      I do think I was correct in my read of the OP screenshot as indicating a desire to own and profit of the labor of a “person”—a position which should be examined and the underpinnings of which roundly rejected.

      At a base level it’s the same underpinning that inform people’s desire to be landlords.

      • @Ajen
        link
        13 months ago

        I do think I was correct in my read of the OP screenshot as indicating a desire to own and profit of the labor of a “person”—a position which should be examined and the underpinnings of which roundly rejected

        My mind went in a different direction when I read it. It made me think about the Citizens United ruling and how legal recognition (or lack of recognition) doesn’t guide my moral compass. And practically speaking, I don’t think AI would be legally recognized as a “person” unless it benefits the ruling class and widens the wealth gap.

        I also disagree with your judgement. There are definitely red flags in the post, but I don’t think it’s fair to read between the lines and jump to conclusions based on one post. It could easily be a satire account.