A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
China definitely doesn't want that many workers suddenly disenfranchised and angry
Why does the Chinese government worry about sudden mass unemployment in a way Western governments do not?
They're walking a thin line between restrictive policies and QoL guarantees.
It's hard to explain as a non-native English speaker but they basically guarantee an acceptable way of living with mobility, housing, jobs and other stuff in exchange for control, surveillance and censorship.
In Western government the equation looks different, at least for now.
Idk if the equations are different. The values are certainly different
because there’s billions of workers to riot as compared to say a few hundred million in the US.
Ding ding ding
I like this, and so should anyone who wants to see China on an ethical gradient, not black or white. This is unironically one of the advantages of centralized, authoritarian and undemocratic government: you can make decisions like this, just like that. And sometimes these decisions are good, far-sighted.
Now let's not forget about the downsides of China's totalitarianism.
US government is gonna use this to talk about how anti ai movements are "cawmmunist"
I appreciate your nuanced take of recognising achievements where they are made for humans and humanity, while also recognising that no country is perfect and that we are allowed to ask for more from our government and a better future for ourselves without exploitation.
Something most of the tankies can't seem to appreciate for themselves.
The legal reasoning cuts through corporate justifications—AI implementation is a voluntary business decision, not an unforeseeable catastrophe.
It makes sense. Nobody is ready to figure out what to do with those workers cause the chuds of the world are afraid of what happens when you give people UBI (they want to lord over other people through wealth and inequality)
There are definitely worse worlds than one where UBI is what comes out of the AI race... One can dream.
It's not a dream. It's a requirement.
The alternative is a nightmare.
Because China’s government knows the last thing it needs is a bunch of unemployed people.
It’s so weird how single-party rule can sometimes be more responsive to the people. Because there’s no illusion: if the people get unhappy enough, CCP is gone.
Meanwhile the US we live with these bizarre illusions about how the people are truly in power, while our government is driven into the ground by plutocrats and their pet priests.
Nobody's considered who is gonna buy all the stuff when all the employees are laid off
The future is two corporations, eternally B2Bing back and forth across the desiccated husk of the Earth. A perfect, all-encompassing synergy.
This feels like the makings of a good one-off SciFi short in an anthology book or something.
They already did it. An episode of Philip K. Dick's Electric Dreams.
Alien earth pretty much covers this utopia (sarcasm) already. Few huge corporations run earth as a corporatocracy.
I think a statistic I saw recently was that nearly 50% of American consumer spending is attributed to the top 10% of consumers.
Which would largely indicate that it doesn't matter because those who have the money will continue to spend it and those that don't will continue to get poorer.
This is what's happening to Vegas, the number of visitors is dropping but the casino profit is increasing. The city no longer caters to the middle class but to millionaires.
Do Vegas casinos own a sizeable stake in online gaming? If so, it would be interesting to see what part of those increasing profits are due to us poors spending on online gaming increasing while we never set foot in Vegas.
yes and yes. and it was theorized that their online gaming would cannibalize the physical locations which this could also suggest.
I have always loved the saying: Lie, outrageous lie, statistic.
Data is a wonderfull thing, but it often can be really easily to be presented in a way, that while being true, is not representing the truth.
Like if we would just look the numbers containing just necessities and remove the luxury products it would not be that lopsided.
like if you removed luxury products what would this country even produce beside suffering?
This kicks the can down the road a bit, but I don’t see how this is cause for celebration. Businesses will just open a new company and avoid having that company hiring humans to escape labor laws that relate to job elimination. This can all likely be escaped with a little legal hopscotch.
That's what regulation is.
Making things inconvenient over and over again so worse things don't happen, or take significantly longer and require more concerted effort to happen. It's a good thing. We should make it harder for bad actors to do shitty things.
Pretending something is pointless because it may not be 100% effective is absurd.
Pretending something is pointless because it may not be 100% effective is absurd.
I feel like this point needs to be made more and more lately. Perfect is the enemy of better.
Eating is also just kicking the can down the road, you'll just get hungry again later.
I never understood this kind of argument. Everything is just kicking the can down the road, that doesn't make it not worthwhile.
Honestly I think its China just protecting its economy, western businesses are already finding that AI now costs more than just hiring humans and gives a worse output, the chinese government is just preventing their own economy from falling into the same trap.
In a socialized economy, unemployment should be a goal. If a worker can be replaced with AI, the employer's taxes should increase, and UBI should increase.
The economy that demands humans perform work better performed by machines is deeply perverted.
They say they don't want to replace workers. They say they just want to use AI to make existing workers more efficient. Very well; let's hold them to their word.