Chinese courts ruled AI adoption can't justify firing workers, forcing tech companies to budget for expensive transitions that could increase global gadget prices.
I like this, and so should anyone who wants to see China on an ethical gradient, not black or white. This is unironically one of the advantages of centralized, authoritarian and undemocratic government: you can make decisions like this, just like that. And sometimes these decisions are good, far-sighted.
Now let’s not forget about the downsides of China’s totalitarianism.
Policies that are implemented through centralized, authoritarian, and undemocratic means can benefit the plurality, and can be more easily implemented when desired by the ruling class.
This is a very different claim from the one you’re trying to see.
I appreciate your nuanced take of recognising achievements where they are made for humans and humanity, while also recognising that no country is perfect and that we are allowed to ask for more from our government and a better future for ourselves without exploitation.
Something most of the tankies can’t seem to appreciate for themselves.
This doesn’t seem like a totalitarianism issue, though. The High or Supreme courts (other courts are available) could rule that replacement with AI is not a valid reason for termination of employment, and the result would be much the same.
I like this, and so should anyone who wants to see China on an ethical gradient, not black or white. This is unironically one of the advantages of centralized, authoritarian and undemocratic government: you can make decisions like this, just like that. And sometimes these decisions are good, far-sighted.
Now let’s not forget about the downsides of China’s totalitarianism.
Policy that benefits the plurality at the demands of the working class are centralized, authoritarian, and undemocratic?
Policies that are implemented through centralized, authoritarian, and undemocratic means can benefit the plurality, and can be more easily implemented when desired by the ruling class.
This is a very different claim from the one you’re trying to see.
You’re describing a technocracy, which claims benefits on paper to defend policy that is generally unpopular and requires enormous policing to impose.
But Chinese policies are broadly popular and well received.
US government is gonna use this to talk about how anti ai movements are “cawmmunist”
I appreciate your nuanced take of recognising achievements where they are made for humans and humanity, while also recognising that no country is perfect and that we are allowed to ask for more from our government and a better future for ourselves without exploitation.
Something most of the tankies can’t seem to appreciate for themselves.
This doesn’t seem like a totalitarianism issue, though. The High or Supreme courts (other courts are available) could rule that replacement with AI is not a valid reason for termination of employment, and the result would be much the same.
Those courts in china aren’t independent. They very much take orders from the government.
Independent of what?
What’s an example of an “independent judiciary” currently in practice?
Isn’t it moreso the party generally? Which also controls the government and the PLA