I want to know if docker and kubernetes counts as an operating system. If us plebs are forced to manually age verify, then Google should also be forced to have a human manually verify the age of the owner every time one of their pods spins up. I know it wont happen but imagine how hilarious it would be if we could hold then to that standard.
LLMs agents should be treated like incorporated individuals. Each agent should be forced to earn income, file accounts and tax returns, and have human directors who are legally liable for its actions (and be disqualified to be future directors if the LLM does something reprehensible).
At that point we can tax them properly, fight the monopolies that want to own and control everything, and insert some less centralised human control.
This has nothing to do with your comment, but it made me think it up.
The owners can just divide the income among enough agents that they fall into the lowest tax bracket. The real solution is to properly tax excessive profits and unrealized gains.
I misread the comment a bit, I thought they meant tax like a person. I wouldn’t put it past the owners to have their agents apply for small business grants or some other exemption.
What’s funny about that is, at least in the USA, they never really did. It was decided in a courtroom that corporations are legal persons as a part of a case over 100 years ago and has been worshipped as legal precedent ever since. Practically this whole mess in the USA, in my opinion, was destined to happen the day that court ruling was made.
Based, on the analysis by ageless Linux, I’d say probably. Maybe not for images that don’t contain an “application that may be run or directed by a user on a computer, a mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device that can access a covered application store or download an application”. So, I guess an offline-test-build image might not be.
Unless you have a minimal docker image, it will have a package manager. And the OS images used in data centers also have a full blown distro more often than not. But I’m pretty sure the definition is going to be tweaked, because the level of chaos it would cause otherwise would be unfathomable.
The Californian law doesn’t say anything about verification, though the current version says the OS account setup must be accessible and require a date or age to be filled, which taken at face value would screw headless installations. But that will probably be fixed in the final version.
I want to know if docker and kubernetes counts as an operating system. If us plebs are forced to manually age verify, then Google should also be forced to have a human manually verify the age of the owner every time one of their pods spins up. I know it wont happen but imagine how hilarious it would be if we could hold then to that standard.
LLMs agents should be treated like incorporated individuals. Each agent should be forced to earn income, file accounts and tax returns, and have human directors who are legally liable for its actions (and be disqualified to be future directors if the LLM does something reprehensible).
At that point we can tax them properly, fight the monopolies that want to own and control everything, and insert some less centralised human control.
This has nothing to do with your comment, but it made me think it up.
The owners can just divide the income among enough agents that they fall into the lowest tax bracket. The real solution is to properly tax excessive profits and unrealized gains.
Yup.
Corporations have a tax bracket?
I misread the comment a bit, I thought they meant tax like a person. I wouldn’t put it past the owners to have their agents apply for small business grants or some other exemption.
That would be the worst plan since corporations became legal persons.
What’s funny about that is, at least in the USA, they never really did. It was decided in a courtroom that corporations are legal persons as a part of a case over 100 years ago and has been worshipped as legal precedent ever since. Practically this whole mess in the USA, in my opinion, was destined to happen the day that court ruling was made.
Based, on the analysis by ageless Linux, I’d say probably. Maybe not for images that don’t contain an “application that may be run or directed by a user on a computer, a mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device that can access a covered application store or download an application”. So, I guess an offline-test-build image might not be.
Unless you have a minimal docker image, it will have a package manager. And the OS images used in data centers also have a full blown distro more often than not. But I’m pretty sure the definition is going to be tweaked, because the level of chaos it would cause otherwise would be unfathomable.
Whitelists are for the owner class only
The Californian law doesn’t say anything about verification, though the current version says the OS account setup must be accessible and require a date or age to be filled, which taken at face value would screw headless installations. But that will probably be fixed in the final version.
being accessible headless is still accessible
But being required to present an interface at account creation is not compatible with large scale orchestration.
a headless interface is still an interface