You generally won’t understand another person (and adversary especially) if you don’t see how their actions perfectly make sense for them, and without conspiracies.
So - there is one matching variant, that Musk sincerely hates bureaucratic kinds of power, but not proprietary kinds of power. Replacing a bureaucrat with (some imagined good) AI in another assumption would be replacing a mediocre human with inherent lust for power with an unreliable automaton, but without lust for power. The good part here is that humans are unreliable too and working bureaucracies compensate for that.
The bad part is that for every failure a person should be responsible proportionally to their input. I’m not sure they’ll do that, or I’m sure they won’t.
You generally won’t understand another person (and adversary especially) if you don’t see how their actions perfectly make sense for them, and without conspiracies.
So - there is one matching variant, that Musk sincerely hates bureaucratic kinds of power, but not proprietary kinds of power. Replacing a bureaucrat with (some imagined good) AI in another assumption would be replacing a mediocre human with inherent lust for power with an unreliable automaton, but without lust for power. The good part here is that humans are unreliable too and working bureaucracies compensate for that.
The bad part is that for every failure a person should be responsible proportionally to their input. I’m not sure they’ll do that, or I’m sure they won’t.
That would make sense if corporate bureaucracy was not bureaucracy. But it is.
Yes, but corporate bureaucracy is someone’s property, so ultimately there is a responsible person, always.