Thread

1. proc0 · 1790557316 · focus · HN ↗

   Pocket change. They should stocks. Everyone should get stocks considering AI is trained on everyone's data.

   1. someonebaggy · 1790559902 · focus · HN ↗

      They'd probably lose money on the stocks with the way things are going. It'd let the owners offload risk. The residents are free to use the money to buy stocks if they want to.

      1. JumpCrisscross · 1790560389 · focus · HN ↗

         An annual recurring payment may honestly be the way to do it.

         1. [deleted] · 1790569225 · focus · HN ↗

            [deleted]

         2. yellowapple · 1790580435 · focus · HN ↗

            At some point we're just doing LVT-funded UBI with extra steps.

            1. JumpCrisscross · 1790584501 · focus · HN ↗

               > we're just doing LVT-funded UBI with extra steps

               They're only extra if the version with fewer steps works. Communities that can host datacenters have leverage. People who want to build datacenters have capital.

               1. yellowapple · 1790585077 · focus · HN ↗

                  In this case the version with fewer steps does indeed work quite well.

                  1. JumpCrisscross · 1790585555 · focus · HN ↗

                     > the version with fewer steps does indeed work quite well

                     Where? Because everything I can think of that comes close to a working UBI has a funding model behind it.

                     1. yellowapple · 1790589024 · focus · HN ↗

                        The “LVT-funded” in “LVT-funded UBI” above ain't there just for decoration :)

                        1. JumpCrisscross · 1790595329 · focus · HN ↗

                           > The “LVT-funded” in “LVT-funded UBI” above ain't there just for decoration

                           Sure. How many of these exist?

                           If some steps take something out of the realm of theory into practice, they aren't extra.

                           1. yellowapple · 1790620934 · focus · HN ↗

                              LVT (and land leases, the logical conclusion of charging 100% LVT) have been successfully tried all over the world, and so has UBI. Combining the two is hardly some spherical-cow-style theoretical construct.
               2. fakedang · 1790587300 · focus · HN ↗

                  The communities don't have leverage, just the corrupt politicians in them.
         3. kanwisher · 1790587436 · focus · HN ↗

            You mean taxes? like they will have to pay anyways
      2. stevemk14ebr · 1790560836 · focus · HN ↗

         That's for the recipient to decide

         1. someonebaggy · 1790561648 · focus · HN ↗

            They can decide by either keeping the money or using it to buy stocks. At the highest P/E ratio in history and the early signs of a global financial meltdown, I think I'd keep the money - or buy gold, or canned food.
      3. proc0 · 1790569075 · focus · HN ↗

         If the stocks lose value then nothing was really lost, since it would mean AI is a bubble and not much will change. This would be to offset whatever impact AI will have. The more it succeeds the more people get paid. Not saying it's a good idea, but I do think it's better than UBI.

         1. someonebaggy · 1790588289 · focus · HN ↗

            Not much will change for the internet. The town will still have to deal with polluted drinking water and chronic asthma.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.