What I described was the period with companies but no unions. What you described, where some "good companies" existed, was an era with unions.

Spot the difference. Hint - it is not the existence of companies.

This is not relevant, get a clue about what is being discussed if you want to butt in.

Nope, companies by themselves absolutely didn't benefit mankind in that way. The work was back breaking in early industrialisation era as well. The work conditions were cramped, dangerous and arduous. It took employees to band together to fight for their rights to improve the working conditions.

Internationally, the early companies (e.g. the various East India companies) also created their own armies, subjugated whole countries, caused wars, artificial famines , enslaved and killed millions of people within a century.

Ok, but you started the story mid-way. Even before all this, comes the system. The reason why companies are allowed to exist at all. So "why they exist", and "their job", etc. all are viewed by that lens. Is the whole system benefitting mankind ? Or, since we have nicely cleaved "mankind" into sovereign countries, is the system at least benefitting the people of the country ?

It might be, but not likely. Especially given both the examples you give make no sense.

TSMC keeps building new fabs all the time. 7 nm fab built ? Working with good yield ? Nice. Who is the best suited to improve yield when there are problems ? The people who built the fab. TSMC wants to build a unit in the US ? Who gets consulted to decide whether the US is good enough for it ? What resources should we look for in the location in the US for building 7 nm fab in the US as well ? The same people, who build the fab in the first place. Who is best suited to build the 5 nm fab ? While there may be some physics / nano engineering required that was not done for the 7 nm fab, who can help the best in not repeating the mistakes / inefficiencies that happened during the 7 nm fab ? The very same people.

Software companies ? Very similar, I'll be briefer here. The very same people who built the original code will know and understand what corners were cut in the original rush of delivering - and when the product cannot scale can directly to fix them. Any other person will have to work much harder to first understand the code, motivations that drove decisions, and then fix them while not knowing what else can be broken. Obviously detailed unit tests was one of the first corners to be cut :)

I know the India problem. Idiots subsidised millions of new LPG "connections" which just means an account using which they can order new cylinder once the original 14 kg cylinder in empty. But newer cylinders are crazy expensive. So the empty cylinders and gas stove are used for decorating the indoor or outdoor "kitchen" where wood or charcoal cooks the actual food.

Because space with sunlight is "free" at your home, not at the utility. And if they try to reduce land prices by going father from civilization, their transmission losses increase a lot. The transmission losses are negligible within your property.

Homes of people have a reverse economy of scale here.

And you are wrong. Nuclear power by itself does not solve the "global warming" problem at all.

No wonder you are frustrated.

Massive carbon capture powered by nuclear power could solve the problem. Nuclear power widely used 40 years ago could have solved the problem, especially if it replaced fossil fuel burning - so in this case your "solution" is complete only if you also invent a time machine.

But she did (win the election for Vice President). Unless you are saying someone should first demonstrate by winning an election for President, then resign and run for Vice, by your own metrics, she got the most support in the whole world for the particular post she was running for.

Whether by making her the VP candidate, Biden got the support for people of color as well as that of women, it does not matter. She won. She got more votes than the number of people that know your name by your face .

Where did you say that some crimes are ok? Well, if you forget your own arguments, either honesty or sanity is lacking, so I'd just remind :

Exactly, and no one who matters boards the Air Force One. Case rested.

Boeing is not "responsible" for doing the inspection. It is "authorised" to do the inspection on its own, that the regulator is responsible for. The regulator outsourced the job of overseeing Boeing to , whom ? Yes, to Boeing.

No. Generated data has already fallen afoul of copyright. The operators of said system like openAI, and appeasers like you are making no argument this can or will be fixed.

To cover for your failures, you are wrongly insinuating that some crimes are ok. Law in the world largely abhors that idea, which is what I caricatured. If you were directly addressing the argument, you would not have been forced to tell this rotten lie that some crimes are ok.

Now that you have shown that you fundamentally misunderstood the situation and hence my argument, start over. The rest of your post is not relevant due to this misunderstanding.

Ok, so "milord, I just commit murder sometimes. Not always."

" What, I need to never commit murders? That's crazy. Perfect is the enemy of the good enough. Learn some law from Slashdot "

"hard" to get it to infringe copyright doesn't mean anything. It needs to be impossible. The user of the LLM interface may not even have seen the copyright protected work, so clearly the LLM interface had created a mechanism for copyright infringement.

But Google can never infringe because it has limited the quote text length, which has survived lawsuits, that length being fair use.