> their personal goals are simply not aligned with the goals that would be helping the country.

When people express worry over superhuman-AI alignment on forums like this, I find myself wishing they'd shift focus to the fact that we actually already have a problem with the mis-alignment of super-human entities in the form of large corporations and the billionaires who control them. (And yes, governments too; the whole point of our democratic form of government is that it's supposed to keep that behemoth better aligned with the values and will of "the people".)

To me it seems obvious that keeping a misaligned super-AGI from destroying humanity and keeping billionares and large multinational corporations from destroying humanity with climate change in the long-term or just degrading our quality of life (via pollution, wealth inequality, etc.) in the short term are really just differences of degree and not of kind.

But we actually have the latter problem right now, and, as a bonus, if we can figure out better ways of aligning our carbon-based and economic-legal system "overlords" in the present maybe it helps point us toward a better way of aligning our potential silicon-based "overlords" in the future.

Congratulations, you've discovered class analysis. Unfortunately, that mode of thinking was successfully stigmatized during the Cold War's red scare, so good luck getting any group with power to take it seriously.

Yeah, the problem is that the interests of the cutters are not necessarily aligned with the interests of the people. You can argue in good faith about whether efficiency should be an overriding goal of government, but I think it’s pretty clear why the republican budget proposal includes a $400m carveout for armored teslas.

well good thing we have inspectors general to make sure that people in the government are acting correctly!

oh wait

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_dismissals_of_inspectors_...

Good example is the CFPB. If they destroy it return all the money to taxpayers as Elon is saying he is doing, it's about 2 dollars to each of us. In return, we have a largely unregulated banking system that can do things like charge structuring for credit cards and checking account to maximize fees or overdrafts in a frankly fraudulent manner. It will cost us billions of dollars as a society to not have those protections anymore. Not to mention things like forced subscriptions that are impossible to cancel that the CFPB has been working against.

I'm pretty sure I would pay 2 dollars to not have to deal with any of those consequences.

>I'm pretty sure I would pay 2 dollars to not have to deal with any of those consequences.

Those 'costs' to society are 'profits' to the banks. You don't get to have a choice about it. Elon is in charge and he's going with the banks.

Most banking regulations today do not come from the CFPB.

That's beside the point. Chances are you are saved more than the cost.

It directly addresses the notion posed by the commenter I was replying to with regard to the origin of banking regulations.

We have, in no particular order:

- The FDIC

- The SEC

- The Federal Reserve Board

- The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency

Those agencies regulate banking. Then we can go further and we have:

- The National Credit Union Organization

- The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA)

- The Financial Insurance Office (part of Treasury)

- The Office of Foreign Assets Control

- The Securities Investor Protection Corp.

- The Commodity Futures Trading Commission

- EBISA, ERISA, PBGC for retirement plans...

And we need an additional agency because...?

We don't need the CFPB.

Quick question... Which one of those do I contact when my credit card company is trying to hold me responsible for fraudulent charges on my credit card?

Until someone can answer me that question with a link to a form I can fill out with an agency that has a track record of actually fixing these problems, you've made no progress on convincing me we don't need the CFPB.

What makes you think consolidating the same services under fewer names makes it better? Isn't the system simpler with clearly marked out territories?

It's not obvious to me that some other agency will pick up the same responsibilities. If it happens without a budget change elsewhere then obviously DOGE would be right in cutting this particular agency.

Oh man, a 2008-type event with these doofuses in charge will be amazing...

For a recap: https://youtu.be/ovcno7tiZas

It's like hiring Cookie Monster to make the cookie factory more efficient.

He's just going to plant himself at the end of the conveyor belt of fresh cookies with his mouth open, and get rid of everything else.

Musk is going to try and entrench himself so much, that he'll never be able to countenance his opposition winning and removing him. Unless Trump dislodges him first, he's going to be a permanent problem.