this post was submitted on 25 Oct 2026
330 points (96.9% liked)

Technology

89057 readers
2655 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] temporal_spider@masto.ai 31 points 20 hours ago

@eicker Where is all this concern when banks rob grocery money from poor families? If you've ever lost your week's food money to overdraft fees when you were sure you had it covered, you would hear the tiny violins right along with me.

[–] beep@piefed.world 16 points 20 hours ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] KindnessisPunk@piefed.ca 19 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (2 children)

I wonder who our representatives will make foot the bill for this one? Surely they won't just socialize the losses with how well it worked the last dozen times... Right?

[–] eicker@lemmy.world 41 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

The usual financial crisis playbook has a remarkably consistent cast: 1. banks discover a new way to create risk, 2. executives collect bonuses while it works, and 3. taxpayers get invited to the emergency meeting when it doesn’t. 👉 Somehow the public is always a stakeholder in the losses, but never in the profits.

[–] KindnessisPunk@piefed.ca 3 points 13 hours ago

Ooh, I know, my comment was pure unadulterated sarcasm.

[–] LewdLemon@sh.itjust.works 13 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

This is clearly the exit strategy here. That's why AI companies' try to label their products as "dangerous" and call for their own regulation. On the one hand, they want to be regarded as a matter of "national security" because they bloody well know that this gives them access to taxpayer money, which in turn can bail them out of their failing bet on data center build-out. On the other hand, it helps them shift liability onto regulators if things go south and allows them to say: "We told you we wanted regulation, but you wouldn't listen."

[–] empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Don't forget the other option 3: they want regulation to pull the ladder up behind them so there can be no competition. The open models from China have already proven their 'special' technology can be easily improved upon.

[–] LewdLemon@sh.itjust.works 4 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

True; I skipped this part because the comment I was replying to was about taxpayer money bailouts. What you're describing is the creation of an artificial moat against competitors. And it is correct that this is also a motive behind pushing for regulation.

[–] MagnificentSteiner@lemmy.zip 7 points 19 hours ago

Banks Planning Unprecedented Catastrophe Caused by AI That They Will Make Profit From.

FTFY

[–] a1studmuffin@aussie.zone 7 points 20 hours ago

Note to self: automate utilities churning and deal hunting to maximise savings.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›