>I worry that the fears teachers had of students using AI to submit homework has bled over into all aspects of work.

As one does in academia, so to the market, because now we have financial incentive. It ain't going to stop.

My question is, why? This has been obvious to me over the past decade, and I just got into the financial world on the ground floor 2015-ish. Every damn trade agreement has in one way or another been projecting U.S. soft power through financial integration.

Finance is run on two emotions. Greed/avarice and fear. Three if you count confidence/trust.

Finance is as rational under the hood as the Vatican's books.

Politician's fallacy. We must do something. This is something. We must do it.

Tis a fallacy, but nevertheless, here we are.

It's a business model thing, which seems to supplant law these days. Can't meter P2P. Intermediation to prevent usurpation of network effects is the name of the game in the modern day. No one will say that, but it's the quiet part left explicitly unsaid. The negative space of the incentive structure, if you will.

Reasonably foreseeable is the tonic to cure your attempt at a dilemma. There's a certain beyond which you don't build things because it's evident that society can't be trusted with it.

I have unfortunately lived long enough to see my passion cross this line.

If you don't mind answering, what exactly was this particular passion of yours?

> There's a certain beyond which you don't build things because it's evident that society can't be trusted with it.

Where does one draw the line and under what conditions? Reasonable minds can differ on the definition of foreseeable.

After all, Some of the most beneficial inventions to mankind have also aided its worst tendencies. For instance, the 20th and 21st centuries as we know them wouldn't exist without the combustion engine. Simultaneously, it's this same device that has significantly contributed to the pollution of the air.

Secondly, how does one mean to stop society or any individual from learning and building on new ideas in the Information age? Is such a thing even possible?

Don't you mean Plato's Republic?

Sorry I'm late, but info propagation lag is a bitch.

Heh.

Peter Medawar's Pluto's Republic isn't Plato's Republic but it's title was prompted by people so confidently and blatently incorrect about content and author that they deserved a shoutout.

That is a quality specifically selected against or so I hear. LE wants executors and enforcers. Not thinkers.

No shit. All data brokery is a poison pill to justify itself. Until you illegalize the entire damn endeavor, it'll find a way to justify it's own existence through malicious compliance.

When a government demands people to have more kids to maintain it's inertia; whether it be U.S., China, or anywhere else, I can only say that the plot is completely lost, and said civic edifice deserves the collapse or be reformed through force. A people should never serve a government.