why stop at 1? sounds like a “cost of business” price.

lets bankrupt them next. they obviously have too much power and dont know how to be responsible with it.

people are getting caught up in semantics instead of answering your question, so ill give an opinion as to why its different.

wealthy people are not subject to the same laws and punishments, based souly on their wealth and power getting in the way of the “normal” judiciary process. compared to similar crimes and punishments done by someone who is not in the same class.

the death penalty is also used as a tool to silence political enemies and dissidents, especially in political systems that align with fascism, authoritarianism, etc. (itll start becoming more common in the states, they will just label political rivals and dissidents as “terrorists” more often) whether they commited the crime or not.

essentially, why we may want to redistribute the wealth or “call for the death” of billionaires, its more so that out of everyone, even lowly murderers, their very existence, at the moment they HOARD 1 billion dollars, kills roughly 13,000 people who could have been lifted out of extreme poverty, by that same amount of money, per year, but instead succumb to poverty related deaths.

someone like elon musk as an example, just holding on to a (volatile) 348 billion, causes ROUGHLY 1,000 deaths per day, of people living in extreme poverty, just by him simply holding on to that money. the top 1% in general contribute to roughly 9,159 deaths per day just by hoarding their wealth.

21,500 people on average die from extreme poverty, per day.

they collectively contribute to killing nearly half of the worlds poorest people each day, so that they can have fancy things, and have fancy friends, and do fancy stuff.

that is colder than anything that even the most mentally deranged “lower class” serial killer has ever done.

at least in my personal opinion.

its become more of a confidence man than anything.

ive been testing various models for about 4 years now. conclusions are always the same. even when referencing online material the accuracy is sub par compared to simply looking it up yourself.

its good for certain tasks, but as far as verifying information you are better off using ai to find sources, and then reading those sources yourself as opposed to the write ups it offers.

an example. last night i came across a character in the game “kingdom come: deliverence 2” named the “odd trader” after saving him from bandits he offers to sell you various oddities, one of which being a “broken roman spear” that may or may not be the spear of destiny that pierced jesus christ.

GPT said that you could reforge the spear and that it was VERY powerful, when i asked it specifically how to do that, it said “oh sorry! turns out you cant do that, its just an easter egg!”

this happens constantly. but many people who use it dont verify the output, and take it at face value. especially adamant defenders of AI and especially chatgpt.

i know some fan boys will get pissy hearing this, and thats okay. in order for a technology to improve you have to acknowledge its flaws. thats a part of innovation.

also, i do believe AI will cause far more harm than good in the coming years if it is capable of advancing the way people suggest it might. and this particular flaw is a part of that harm. we cant speed run AI without severe risks.