"Petrostate" meaning that the proceeds of the petroleum we sell is turned around and used for the betterment of the entire state. I think it's clear what OP was saying and you're being purposefully obtuse about this.
It means nothing for the US to be the biggest oil producer in the world when the proceeds and riches of "producing" that oil are hoarded by a small number of oil barons.
Correct. We are meant to be wage slaves. That is why there is such a malaise these days. Everyone has sort of realized that we are meant to wage slave until we are dead, and our "productive" years are spent providing retirement income to the older generations.
Idk if people thought differently about this in the past, or just didn't care, or just weren't able to see the myriad ways that people get to live (social media) when they are not wage slaves. But something is wrong.
So even in your example you still need to have someone to ask the AI to play chess. So there will still be a need for someone somewhere to ask the AI to do something and supervise it or guide it in the right direction.
You've misunderstood my position. My argument is not that "AIs can operate independently and don't need supervision," but rather that "AIs are able or will soon be able to perform complex behaviors directly without having to create traditional software first." The chess example is illustrative because you can play chess with the AI without first asking the AI to implement chess-playing software. This means that software is obsolete, not people.
They won't outright cancel the elections but they will do things like send ICE to contested districts to harass law-abiding voters; pressure states to remove people from voter rolls and make it difficult if not impossible for them to re-register in time to be able to vote; and otherwise just scream fraud and cheating and stolen when they lose the House.
It means nothing for the US to be the biggest oil producer in the world when the proceeds and riches of "producing" that oil are hoarded by a small number of oil barons.
reply