this post was submitted on 15 Feb 2026
1265 points (99.6% liked)

Fuck AI

5751 readers
2678 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

link to archived Reddit thread; original post removed/deleted

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AntEater@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

No, not illegal, but they can be sued by the shareholder for failing to maximize value.

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

Not really, no. This is mostly a myth. Unless the executives are deliberately causing the company to lose money, they really can't be sued based on this fiduciary duty to shareholders. They have to act in the shareholders' best interest, but "shareholder interest" is entirely up to interpretation. For example, it's perfectly fine to say, "we're going to lose money over the next five years because we believe it will ensure maximum profits over the long term." In order to sue a CEO for failing to protect shareholders, they would have to be doing something deliberately and undeniably against shareholder interest. Like if they embezzle money into their own bank account, or if they hold a Joker-style literal money burning.

If it were that easy to sue executives for violating their fiduciary duty to shareholders, golden parachutes and inflated executive compensation packages wouldn't exist. But good luck suing a CEO because he's paid too much. He can just claim in court that his compensation will ensure the company attracts the best talent to perform the best they can.

Executives are given wide latitude in how they define the best financial interest of shareholders. Shareholders ultimately do have the ability to remove executives from their positions. This is supposed to be the default way of dealing with incompetent executives. As shareholders already possess the ability to fire a CEO at any time, there is a very high bar to clear before shareholders can also sue executives. It's generally assumed if they really are doing that bad a job, you should just fire them.

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 5 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

Sure, but since it's an unfalsifiable proposition, good luck proving it in court for any specific action.

[–] AntEater@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

Apparently, it does happen: https://tempusfugitlaw.com/real-life-breach-of-fiduciary-duty-case-examples-outcomes/

Particularly of note is the descision around AA's ESG investments.

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

I think this is mixing things up a bit. At least some of the cases there were fraud based.