11–20 of 65 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was on the talk and I found it boring at best. What did you like about it?
Treating cooperations like paper-clip optimizers who try to hack ones brain sounds very reasonable.
Corporations were invented. Could we invent something better?
Or is it just human nature to devolve into the current state of affairs?
EDIT: Just saw that there is a talk by Maxim Goryachy and Mark Ermolov: Inside Intel Management Engine [3], can't miss that one.
[1] https://events.ccc.de/congress/2017/Fahrplan/events/9021.htm...
[2] https://events.ccc.de/congress/2017/Fahrplan/events/9075.htm...
[3] https://events.ccc.de/congress/2017/Fahrplan/events/8762.htm...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Treating cooperations like paper-clip optimizers who try to hack ones brain sounds very reasonable.
Is there an alternative? Corporations were invented. Could we invent something better? Or is it just human nature to devolve into the current state of affairs?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there an alternative? Corporations were invented. Could we invent something better? Or is it just human nature to devolve into the current state of affairs?
There could be a automatic break up mechanism after ten years.
What do you do with the assets? Liquidate them? If so, you’ll just periodically kick out minority shareholders (or promote consolidation).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Treating cooperations like paper-clip optimizers who try to hack ones brain sounds very reasonable.
Is there an alternative? Corporations were invented. Could we invent something better? Or is it just human nature to devolve into the current state of affairs?
How about making just a small tweak to the limited liability corporation legislation/rules? Currently the main purpose of a corporation is to maximize the (long term) shareholder value. What if the purpose was to maximize the long term goods sold, taxes paid or salaries paid instead? Note that you would still need to pay a decent return to shareholders in order to maximize these other things, just like currently you need (usually) to sell goods, pay a salary and pay your taxes to maximize the shareholder value.
(This may sound like a joke, but I am actually serious. Nobody has been able to justify so that I would have understood why it is the common stock holders whose value a corporation maximizes instead of other stakeholders. After all, the original reason limited liability was invented was to enable projects that bring good for the society, but are so damn risky that nobody is willing to take the full liability.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was on the talk and I found it boring at best. What did you like about it?
I found the corporation/AI comparison rather insightful.
I don't have much time this year, but the two talks I intend to watch are Squeezing a key through a carry bit by Filippo Valsorda [1] and LatticeHacks by Tanja Lange, Nadia Heninger and djb[2]. EDIT: Just saw that there is a talk by Maxim Goryachy and Mark Ermolov: Inside Intel Management Engine [3], can't miss that one. [1] https://events.ccc.de/congress/2017/Fahrplan/events/9021.htm... [2] https://events.ccc.de/con…
https://events.ccc.de/congress/2017/Fahrplan/events/8782.htm...
My question is how can the "advice" in CCC and other open investigations into state of the tech world be distilled into actionable things for "normal" techies?
Everyone who is here is a "normal" techie. Sure, skill levels and focus areas vary but there's common shared interests.
Actionable things come out of the conference when someone who listens to a talk starts thinking and discussing and forming ideas for starting or contributing to a project. There's no formula to guarantee "success" for that.