I do think I was correct in my read of the OP screenshot as indicating a desire to own and profit of the labor of a “person”—a position which should be examined and the underpinnings of which roundly rejected

My mind went in a different direction when I read it. It made me think about the Citizens United ruling and how legal recognition (or lack of recognition) doesn’t guide my moral compass. And practically speaking, I don’t think AI would be legally recognized as a “person” unless it benefits the ruling class and widens the wealth gap.

I also disagree with your judgement. There are definitely red flags in the post, but I don’t think it’s fair to read between the lines and jump to conclusions based on one post. It could easily be a satire account.