Thread

1. moomin · 1789570602 · focus · HN ↗

   Look, I do not have a scooby if current AI models are conscious and I strongly suspect it’s a meaningless question, but sooner or later we will need to address whether or not a certain thing is or isn’t a person, and we’d better not screw it up as badly as the Founding Fathers.

   1. OedipusRex · 1789570874 · focus · HN ↗

      Citizens United proves we won't do any better this time around.

      1. orangecat · 1789571009 · focus · HN ↗

         Citizens United was 100% correct. No, the government should not be able to throw you in prison because you used money to publish a book criticizing the government.

         1. fl4regun · 1789571868 · focus · HN ↗

            So it's 100% correct for corporations to spend unlimited amounts of money in support of whatever political campaigns they like?

            1. kbelder · 1789588386 · focus · HN ↗

               Yes. Anybody can, including the person in charge of spending in a corporation.

               1. mitxela · 1789628991 · focus · HN ↗

                  Strange how you substituted "a corporation" for "the person in charge of spending in a corporation", those aren't the same.

                  1. kbelder · 1789680794 · focus · HN ↗

                     That was deliberate, because a corporation makes no spending decisions, ever. All decisions are made by people inside the corporation with the proper responsibility.

                     That is a major part of the reasoning for the Supreme Court rulings on the matter of corporate political funding.

                     1. mitxela · 1789727078 · focus · HN ↗

                        Legally, the corporation itself makes the decision and is responsible for the consequences.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.