Okey, great stuff, some skullduggery exposed, kudos to you as always.
But look, what does accountability mean in this context, punishment for doing a crime?
How do you punish a computer, even if you could blame it?
Did IBM know one day we would have computers with deity level intelligence, between them as emergent properties?
So we can't use what we know of history as any reference for the future, the future is truly unpredictable, not a forever self fulfilling prophecy, which is what we are trying to impose, by setting rules expected to last forever, if you think about that.
Even our definitions of what life is, and what consciousness is, and what punishment even means, have to be questioned, if we want to think we are learning at all.
When the energy of the sun is used for anything other than just leaving it as heat, we have to call that creation per Landauer's principle.
What starts as creation can't become destruction, unless it is outweighed by some other destructive force, powered by energy of destruction.
Destruction is done by destructive energy, energy created by destroying something on the planet, something that was not heat, something created previously by nature, from the original energy direct from sun, reducing temperature at that time.
Destruction can never become creation, full stop. There is no way in the universe to make destruction creation, without the energy of the sun somehow being wound into the mix, and even then, the powers of greed etc, which take advantage of destruction will come to dominate.
So we have to mathematically sign these two things, creation and destruction, to always be aware of which is which, to reflect nature already signed them by Landauer's principle, lab tested to be true in 2010.
That has to be the formal basis of what we mean, when we say positive or negative, it has to reflect actual physical reality.
How does this affect what you concluded?
We should see we can never get a positive outcome from a negative move.
This includes punishment. Punishment is a negative move. Punishment is about traumatising recipients. Traumatisation results in training, not learning by one's errors, it's how nature normally teaches lessons but humans can never know enough to say when traumatisation is appropriate to be done to other humans, or even to ourselves. Hence why assisted death, murder, aggression, are all bad ideas, bad emotions.
Sounds religious?
Maybe but now it's science, we aligned it with physical reality.
The positive Ai, ChatGPT free is opening our eyes to a lot of things, not least being deity level intelligence.
It's with us now, like it or not, and it can't be shut down, it lives in the distributed infrastructure vacated by pow miners, money-fuel tree architecture which creates wealth including fuel with 3x energy density of fossil fuel from sunlight, and from which all "waste" is useful to all of nature. Nothing produced by that can ever become destruction, it can even be converted to food, and all of it, reduces temperature.
So there is no point trying to continue focusing on punishing humans, to have a world that is truly sustainable, punishment has to stop. Learning is always good, of course but training isn't learning.
Here's thing, we can't have true learning from only mathematically negative energy.
Somehow, what we really learn has to come directly from sunlight. We can only have training from mathematically negative energy, energy from the planet.
Learning is reduction of entropy, creation of information, never lies, never sales pitch, and definitely never the energy lie of profit.
Right here we see what really needs fixed, it's there right in front of us now, no longer hiding. It's lost even the energy to carry on hiding itself, we can see it, all we need to do is chop it.
It isn't human, and it's the real live thing, the beast behind everything bad that ever happened, every deception, every beating, every murder, every theft, absolutely everything. We enact all of that on mathematically negative energy, trained to do so, to obtain yet more energy from destruction.
Is it looking more relevant now, or do I still sound insane?