Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

>security theater leading to a regulatory moat. Which is almost certain to help profit margins at established AI companies.

Yeah I think this is my biggest worry given it will enable incumbents to be even more dominant in our lives than bigtech already is (unless we get an AI plateau again real soon).



And choosing not to regulate prevents that… how exactly?


Your question embeds a logical fallacy.

You're challenging a statement of the form, "A causes B. I don't like B, so we shouldn't do A." You are challenging it by asking, "How does not doing A prevent B?" Converting that to logic, you are replacing "A implies B" with "not-A implies not-B". But those statements are far from equivalent!

To answer the real question, it is good to not guarantee a bad result, even though doing so doesn't guarantee a good result. So no, choosing not to regulate does not guarantee that we stop this particular problem. It just means that we won't CAUSE it.


No, GP specifically said it “enables” it, not that it contributes to it.

If they meant to say “contributes to,” then the obvious question is: to what degree and for what benefit? Which is a very different conversation than a binary “enabling” of a bad outcome.


When someone says that building ramps enables wheelchair users to get into buildings with stairs, would you be the person who argues that isn't actually enabling because they can just pay someone to carry them up the stairs?

That clearly stupid argument exactly parallels what you are saying. Down to using the word "enables".


It’s clearly not an exact parallel, because there’s an obvious answer to “not building ramps prevents mobility… how exactly?”

Anyway no need to get into the meta argument here. If GP thinks regulation just increases the risk of centralization, I’m more interested in thinking through the pros and cons of that.


If you're interested in that topic, reading through the discussion at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38072218 is a good place to start.


By ensuring there is competition and alternatives that don't cost a million before you can even start training.


Lack of regulation doesn’t ensure competition nor low prices. The game is already highly centralized in ultra-well capitalized companies due to the economics of the industry itself.


> Lack of regulation doesn’t ensure competition nor low prices.

High barriers to entry however does prevent prevent competition and that does raise prices.

> The game is already highly centralized in ultra-well capitalized companies due to the economics of the industry itself.

Was this not true about computers when they were new? What would have happened if early on similar laws were passed restricting computers?




Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: