Argentina's proposed non-human corporation category, outlined in President Milei's recent op-ed, would let AI agents or robots operate entities with independent judgment and limited liability even if no human shareholders are required, prompting policy scholar Dean W. Ball to suggest that wholly autonomous versions may need an international ban because risks remain too uncertain to evaluate.
@deanwball Agree if by autonomous here you mean no human beneficial owner!
For what it’s worth, I have very high uncertainty about the desirability of wholly autonomous corporations. There’s some world where it all works out fine, but if I had to single out one practice we may well need to international cooperation to ban, it would be this.
Replies from figures such as Séb Krier, David Pfau, and David Manheim point to difficulties tracing beneficial owners once AI systems can file paperwork or persist after any initial human dies, alongside the possibility that nominal human overseers might sell their legal responsibility for very little money.
Roon and others note that any global prohibition would be hard to police, while the exact wording, scope, and passage status of Argentina's submitted legislation remain unavailable, leaving unclear how disclosure rules would function in practice or whether pilots already exist.
Many users condemned Argentina's zero-regulation AI framework enabling non-human corporations as techno-fascism or a billionaire-favoring scam, while some praised it as excellent or the dawn of a golden age.
Now we know why Peter Thiel packed his bags for Argentina.
Milei just submitted his AI legislative framework to Congress, where he proposes: - zero regulation on AI development, - a brand-new "non-human corporation" category for AI/robot-operated entities with limited liability -a low-tax regime with flexible governance rules.
The Dutch East India Company gave the world the limited liability company in 1602. Milei wants Argentina to do the same for autonomous AI agents in 2026.
holy shit Argies are so cooked
Javier Milei on Argentina's plans for AI https://giftarticle.ft.com/giftarticle/actions/redeem/b98f98a1-3f8b-4a62-acae-5918ca388b74
@tszzl It’s fine for them to be real with a small human proxy, so long as there is ultimately a human who can be held responsible for the firm’s actions and vice versa a human who benefits from the firm’s actions
Full text
@deanwball how would you ever print them from being real with a small human proxy?
For what it’s worth, I have very high uncertainty about the desirability of wholly autonomous corporations. There’s some world where it all works out fine, but if I had to single out one practice we may well need to international cooperation to ban, it would be this.
@trajektoriePL Thiel jest wniebowzięty, bo będzie mógł bez ograniczeń wprowadzać swój technologiczny faszyzm.
Argentyński libertarianizm będzie oparty na CBDC, digital ID i pewnie UBI
@deanwball Same. Corporations acting for their own sake makes no sense, same with agents. Some related points from my RSI piece:
@sebkrier Correct; liable/responsible/benefitting human is what I care about
@trajektoriePL Yeah, bc we wouldn’t want to stall the progress of a new tech in order to *checks notes* KEEP ACTUAL PEOPLE SAFE.
@trajektoriePL @StevePPhill Thiel, Milei both #KochNetwork
The comical part is the AI/crypto oligarchy flipped (basically overnight) from the Dems and threw $500 million at Trump’s campaign because he promised not to regulate shit in the AI, data center, crypto and betting market sphere, and he’s actually delivering. It’s the one thing he’s ACTUALLY doing that he said he’d do.
But of course it isn’t good enough. These cuntbags always want a little bit more profit, a little bit less liability, a little bit lower of a tax bill. Heaven forbid they have $5.8 billion instead of $6 billion or whatever. Fuck me.
@trajektoriePL Milei is the modern day Oliver Cromwell.
After the Puritan parliament found King Charles l guilty of treason, he was beheaded on January 30, 1649 . Cromwell took power, then invaded Ireland in 1649-1653, and Scotland in 1650. Cromwell then invited the Jews back to England.
@trajektoriePL
@sebkrier @deanwball Seems easy to imagine a future where corporations have nominal officers and directors for compliance reasons, but the cash flows are otherwise directed/retained autonomously.
Such a system could respond to market demand without the teleology emanating from any single human
I'm not in politics so I don't have to be as measured here... autonomous legal entities with real financial resources not under human control are one of the worst ideas I've ever heard and should be nuked from orbit.
For what it’s worth, I have very high uncertainty about the desirability of wholly autonomous corporations. There’s some world where it all works out fine, but if I had to single out one practice we may well need to international cooperation to ban, it would be this.
@deanwball does banning autonomous corporations even do anything? people will just run the autonomous corporation under a person who doesn’t add anything
@trajektoriePL Eh I think the non-human corporation is where we jump the shark. So basically a corporation with zero accountability whatsoever? Do something illegal, we just put the machine in jail cell? Unplug it? What's the punishment for non-human corporate crime against humans?
@trajektoriePL He knows the libs will win in 2028 and the progress we’re making is going to come to a hault in the US
@lacker @deanwball That is decidedly *not* why corporations were created.
They are vehicles for optimizing for the benefit of human stock holders:
https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2023/12/13/delaware-law-requires-directors-to-manage-the-corporation-for-the-benefit-of-its-stockholders-and-the-absurdity-of-denying-it/
@trajektoriePL @2lewerece https://youtu.be/IheSG1HtmRQ?si=kUU9jTfo_QNvwDB8
@teortaxesTex How bad could it be?
