• partial_accumen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    If Intel had trotted out Chip and then announced it would be creating a universal basic income scheme based on the savings the company was amassing by using Chip, then I’d be clapping along with the audience. As it stands, it just seems like bad taste during a difficult time.

    I’m not sure the author of the article has a realistic understanding of Intel’s role or ability to affect change public policy.

    • aesthelete@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      It’s true that Intel probably shouldn’t be handing out UBI, but if companies want to promote how much they don’t need people’s labor anymore, then that should be taken into consideration in policy making.

      Somewhere along the line we lost one of the basic things underpinning our current economic structure – that corporations are supposedly better at allocating, distributing, and utilizing resources than a centrally planned economy with a governmental overlord. It sure sounds to me like Intel and other companies that are handing out pink slips for every bit of thing they automate cannot find anything to do with the human resources they’ve got.

      To put it more simply, corporations aren’t allowed to exist purely because they “make money”. One of their primary functions is to employ people.

      • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        It’s true that Intel probably shouldn’t be handing out UBI, but if companies want to promote how much they don’t need people’s labor anymore, then that should be taken into consideration in policy making.

        Yes exactly, policy making at the government level, not at the corporate level as the author was suggesting.

        To put it more simply, corporations aren’t allowed to exist purely because they “make money”.

        Under capitalism, yes they are.

        One of their primary functions is to employ people.

        I’d argue under capitalism, that isn’t even a secondary function. Employing people may be tertiary at best.

  • dbkblk@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    An AI robot to look for sensors that can be already read since decades? What is that marketing bullshit?