[keiferski]

AI is pretty much the culmination of technocapital, so frankly the idea that a nonprofit without deep government support would be the leading AI company is a little unrealistic in the first place. Especially considering the heavy capital requirements to even make this stuff functional in the first place.

I think you’d need a government organization on the level of Manhattan Project to really compete, but unfortunately there don’t seem to be many Robert Oppenheimers and Vannevar Bushes working in the public sector anymore.

[redwoolf]

The public has no stomach for collective action anymore. All for one and one for all? Nah, man, what’s yours is mine and what’s mine is mine.

[keiferski]

Agreed but historically at least this came from a strong executive, not from collective action. FDR, for example.

[dTal]

Government is the avatar of collective action. People vote for and otherwise tolerate a strong executive when they believe in "all for one and one for all". FDR was elected by a landslide on a platform of heavy government interventionism to address the Great Depression.

[redwoolf]

Totally agree.

I think with the suburban explosion and rise of the personal automobile we’ve seen individualism trump collectivism. I don’t think we’ll ever see a new deal or social security like initiative in America until the power structures in our society are changed fundamentally.

[trilbyglens]

None of those people were in the public sector until the project was created and drew them in.

But I agree, leaving this work up to shit eating PE firms and smarmy VC bros is asking for disaster.

[keiferski]

That’s a good point, you’d really need a massive government project to be started first in order to draw away the talent. Hopefully that becomes possible without a looming war as impetus…