Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | optimalsolver's commentslogin

Citizenship guarantees service.

I find it hard to believe the kids of the Swiss elite would be cleaning sewers if not for the low pay.

No no, they would have totally done it if the immigrants didn’t suppress the wages and the pay was %15 higher. Now they need to do some office jobs for 5 times the pay since the unemployment rate is %3. There are no Swiss sitting around and not cleaning the sewers because the pay was too low, it will have to fetch workers from other industries.

Immigrants do not suppress wages, business owners do.

The solution there is the same solution as the US. If the US introduced a (for example) 4x median salary fine for every year an employer employed someone not legally eligible to work the problem would fix itself. If they did not keep records assume 5 years or whenever the person's visa expired, since that is the most common case of illegal immigration.

But the businesses WANT a class of people they can underpay who can't gain access easily to legal services when the employer screws them over.

If the people are employed legally and are being paid the minimum wage, then your complaint is with the government and you should elect people that will raise the minimum wage.


I agree with your argument but this particular case is for the legal workers, just like UK significant portion of the Swiss population don’t want legal workers from the rest of Europe. They attempted to limit the legal rights of the EU citizens that currently have.

This kind of argument is the same as "guns don't kill people". Yes they do.

Explain in detail

Little Pete can't shoot himself in the head by mistake with daddy's glock if there isn't a glock in the house and daddy has to deposit his guns at the armory. Switzerland fixed its gun suicide epidemic by requiring this, by the way.

Not an anecdotal fact: https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2024/guns-remain-leading-cause-...


>Immigrants do not suppress wages, business owners do.

Of course business owners suppress wages. By using immigrants as leverage to tilt the supply/demand of labor in their favor. Duh.


This is the best argument in the thread against allowing immigration. That sounds awful. Better to avoid by keeping them out

Why not vote to legalize slavery again instead if you want to take the worst possible take on the argument.

The higher paying water systems jobs are in fact filled by the children of the elite in both Switzerland and the US; it is a very impressive green job that they tend to get pushed to leave for more conservatively stable jobs.

I grew up at the border. A friend, who wasn't the brightest of the bunch, found a job to flip burgers at McDonalds after highschool. He was paid a salary higher than the French median wage. Not all Swiss are "elite", far from it.

Switzerland has onlite elite kids? What do all the Swiss with <80 IQ do for a living? They're probably not gonna get a job at ABB, Google, UBS or ETH.

Citizenship guarantees service.

No, $5B is the amount they put into Anthropic earlier this year, but that's in addition to $8B already invested.

Also, $50B is not Amazon's current stake in OpenAI, it's what they've agreed to invest.

By that measure, Amazon's stake in Anthropic is in the tens of billions.

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/04/20/amazon-invest-up-to-25-billi...


Would be funny if they got themselves nationalized.

I mean, better safe than sorry, right Dario?


No way the US is going to nationalize a tech company regardless of what happens. The exodus of capital would be unimaginable.

> "No way the US is going to nationalize a tech company regardless of what happens. The exodus of capital would be unimaginable."

You simply cannot apply any sort of actual logic to the reasoning of the current U.S. government's actions... They just "do stuff" because they feel like it, with no clear thought whatsoever of any potential consequences that may occur.


> "No way the US is going to tariff the entire world regardless of what happens. The exodus of capital would be unimaginable."

It's Madman theory all the way down.

The CEO of Anthropic himself has said AI is like a nuclear bomb when justifying export controls on Nvidia chips. How many private companies control nuclear bombs?

They took 10% of Intel and the only reaction was my stocks increasing in value 5x.

Taking a 10% stake in a company is far from nationalization. And the big increase in Intel's stock price happened months after that.

It is literally partially nationalising though, isn’t it?

This is how the UK government got the banks through the 2008 financial crisis.


They bought the shares on the open market. They didn't seize the company at gunpoint.

Why would you think nationalising is a violent process?

As soon as the nation owns enough stock to profit from government decisions (and to compound the influence of those decisions) you essentially have a partially nationalised business.

10% of OpenAI might easily be enough to reach a meaningful "partially nationalised" threshold, once you factor in any holdings in federal pension plans and the active level of government policymaking.

It is very clear Sam Altman wants this, too, because this whole "take 10%" thing in Trump's mind was his idea back in early 2025, and OpenAI have been following up on it recently.

They want the US government to be the bag holder.


No they didn’t. After Trump started making noise about their CEO, Lip-bu Tan, being Chinese they then took the shares at a “…discount to the current market price.”[1]

And the money for this _deal_ was primarily from the CHIPS act funds they were already awarded but had not been sent to them yet

> Of the total, $5.7 billion of the government funds will come from grants under the CHIPS Act that had been awarded but not paid, and $3.2 billion will come from separate government awards under a program to make secure chips.[1]

This was at gunpoint from the government’s monopoly on violence.

[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2025/08/22/intel-goverment-equity-stake...


???

The government had passed a law appropriating funds to subsidize semiconductor manufacturing in the US and spent some of it buying intel stock. How is that the government seizing Intel at gunpoint? I mean aside from the libertarian argument that the taxation necessary to raise those funds is theft?


Did you miss the part where it was already awarded to them, but the Trump admin then made it conditional?

So if USgov bought 51% at market value you’d be ok with that?

Time to fire up the printers I guess.


Taking any % is partially nationalizing it and there was no negative capital flight. And 10% is a pretty significant portion.

> Trump says his team will 'look into' US taking stake in AI companies[1]

Yes, there is a gap between "taking a stake" and nationalizing one, but..

[1] https://www.reuters.com/business/trump-says-his-team-will-lo...


Trump has already (with Altman directly egging him on) talked about the US taking a share in (i.e. partially nationalising) the AI companies. Has he not called a meeting about this next week?

Banning white people would reduce it by a much greater amount, at least in North America.

As 8note is pointing out, Eliezer Yudkowsky didn't "take over" Less Wrong, he founded it.

Is it too much to ask that people read the article before commenting?

I bet Schrödinger could get a cat into a box.

Yea, but getting out alive is the hard part.

>So many people were trying to sign the petition at once that it actually crashed Google Docs

I still wonder how much peer pressure was behind that. Like, what if you think Sam is a scumbag and you're glad he's gone, but people are waving this petition in your face. What would you do? It would be really bad for you if the emperor returned and you were one of the few who didn't sign it.

Also, going by this video, the first order of business for an AGI should be finding a cure for hair loss.


Nioxin shampoo generally works.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: