[pokstad]

If the public wants to own half of the AI company, then they should invest enough to buy half of it. Taking private property away without compensation is stealing. What the government did with Intel where they got 10% in stock was a bit better because Intel got money.

[opsnooperfax]

You basically described taxation. 25-75% of all your income is confiscated at the source and then you get… whatever it is that Washington does. I guess remit the money back as programs and direct payments or services so thousands of people can wet their beak in the process?

In practice, we’re OK with theft. We just argue over who gets the loot and which segment of the population gets harmed.

[sobellian]

There is a line between tax and unlawful taking. The constitution forbids taking of property without due process or compensation. No, the government can't just take whatever it likes from anyone and call it a tax.

Taxes generally demand payment in the form of general assets, but taking targets specific identified property. Likewise taxes are raised from a general category whereas taking singles out one or a few properties. Now if it was just the targeting of AI companies you could argue it's a one-time AI tax rather than singling out those companies for taking. But once you state that the tax must be paid by shares (and not just assets equal to 50% of market cap) that looks less like a tax and more like appropriation of equity for public good without compensation.

There are other vulnerabilities too - income taxes are explicitly exempted from apportionment. This "tax" would probably run afoul of apportionment.

[thedevilslawyer]

Eminent domain. It can be made to apply to AI.

[snake42]

Is income tax stealing?

[LetsGetTechnicl]

I mean gen AI is based on theft, I don't really see that as a deterrent. I don't want the companies to exist, and having government ownership sounds like a convenient way to get bailed out when the bubble pops

[pokstad]

That only is true if you agree with IP laws. China doesn’t, and you won’t be able to take 50% of the Chinese AI companies. American AI companies won’t be able to compete against Chinese ones if we take that stance.

[lern_too_spel]

This is why public ownership makes sense. The public allows AI to get the data that it would otherwise need to steal in order to be globally competitive, and in return, the company that builds the AI allows the public to own it.