But you didn't say you had proof with your comment, you said it was probable. Basically saying its common sense that its proven.
Why are you getting aggressive about actually having to provide proof about something when saying its obvious?
Also, that seems to imply that locking up people for AI offenses would then encourage truly reprehensible behavior by linking them with those who already engage in it.
Almost like lumping people together as one big group, instead of having levels of grey area, means people are more likely to just go all in instead of sticking to something more morally defensible.
The system isn't perfect, especially where we prioritize punishing people over rehabilitation. Would you rather punish everyone equally, emphasizing that if people are going to risk the legal implications (which, based on legal systems the world over, people are going to do) they might as well just go for the real thing anyways?
You don't have to accept it as morally acceptable, but you don't have to treat them as completely equivalent either.
There's gradations of questionable activity. Especially when there's no real victims involved. Treating everything exactly the same is, frankly speaking, insane. Its like having one punishment for all illegal behavior. Murder someone? Death penalty. Rob them? Straight to the electric chair. Jaywalking? Better believe you're getting the needle.
Cause if it's not on the entertainment system... they're just going to use their phone? And being afraid of technology because of a small subset of people you assume are misusing it is a little fanatical.
So... in reading the article, it seems he suggest the government is using religion to manipulate people into forgetting about all the aliens they're hiding.
Because it's a tradition from the old testament that some (by no means all) churches use. It's nowhere near as universal as your own anecdotal references seem to imply.
A company is more than its most visible members. There were likely plenty of competent people in the hierarchy that were there before Musk and were able to continue that trend of competency until Musk decided he needed to control more and more of the intricacies of the company.
The difference isnt what he was doing before to make things run smoothly so much as what he wasn't... that being getting in the way. He was a glorified PR guy. Which he was great at. Running a tech and manufacturing company? Not so much.
That's what post-its are for!