[twblalock]

We don't live in a post-scarcity society and AI isn't going to change that. We are constrained by natural resources and energy in numerous ways.

AI replacing human workers isn't going to make UBI possible. It's just going to put people out of work. The core problem with UBI remains: it's not affordable without a magical infinite wealth generator.

[kranke155]

We’re constrained in what way? Are you saying we can’t produce enough food and shelter for virtually all of the human population?

The USSR provided food and shelter using maybe 20-30% of its economy to do so. What is there a scarcity of? iPhones?

Even middle income countries have more problems with obesity and diabetes than hunger. What is there a scarcity of exactly ?

[pxue]

Energy is the obvious problem.

Some 2B people live in constant hot humid weather, if we provide every single one of those people with north american level cooling facility, we'd probably have to increase the world's energy generation by at least 40%. That's no small feat.

[AlecSchueler]

Clean energy. We've got avocados year round but the world is choking to provide it. I think you're ignoring a lie of externalisef costs.

[kranke155]

But that’s the point isn’t it.

If ChatGPT designed robots tomorrow that we could build for 99$ that could automate most farming and most construction, we could have food and shelter built at something like a few percent of our economies.

On clean energy, same thing. Ask AI to work up a plan in 10 years. Ask AI to improve solar panel construction.

In 10-20-40 years what is there a scarcity of, exactly ?

I’m not promising avocados, but there’s certainly no shortage of food when obesity is this prevalent.

[AlecSchueler]

Was that the point?

You were postulating that we already lived in a post scarcity society.

Now the goalposts have moved to require another breakthrough in AI that will have them solving the energy crisis across a period of decades or more.

If you can ask it to design these things tomorrow then why don't you?

10 years from now could be well too late to begin with any of this. 40 years is hard to even imagine with the current rate of climate change.

[kranke155]

I described what I meant by post scarcity here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35351936

In order to be able to engage I’d have to ask you what do you mean by energy crisis?

The next 40 years, if they are of unimpeded climate change, sound shitty indeed.

[agentultra]

Except it doesn’t require magic and late stage capitalism demands infinite growth.

An economic system is merely a system, not a fundamental law of nature like current capitalism wants us to believe.

[_skel]

You can't just engineer whatever the heck you want out of an economic system, or a government, or an entire society. There are at least some fundamental laws of nature, including human nature, at play.

After a century of failed communist experiments all over the world, it's disappointing that people still believe that utopian economic systems are possible.

[agentultra]

Human nature is one of the most bald-faced lies of post-monetarist capitalism.

We are not inherently greedy and there is nothing fundamental or immutable about capitalism.

UBI has nothing to do with communism either.

Changing the rules and structures of the system is going to be necessary if the system isn’t working for the society it serves.

[kranke155]

No one’s defending communism. UBI is not communism. It’s socialism at the bottom, capitalism on top.

[_skel]

I'm not calling UBI communism. That's not the point.

My point is that if we could simply invent any economic system we wanted, communism would have worked.

Communism failed because it's not possible to do that, because there really are some things about human nature and the way economies and societies work that we can't ignore or change, and those factors prevent utopian schemes from working.

[agentultra]

Many socialist states were put down by capitalist democratic ones on purpose before they could even take off.

For example, Chile. The US backed a fascist general in a coup to overthrow a democratically elected socialist. The US didn't back this violent coup because the fledgling socialist state was harming anyone and failing or because this was an authoritarian leader forcing the people to live in a dystopian communist state. The US companies were afraid they would lose their investments in Chile and the profits they gained from them.

Human nature is not a fundamental law of the universe like the speed of light or entropy. Such myths that humans are inherently greedy and self-interested are used to ensure that people can't imagine a system outside of capitalism. After all, if greed is as inevitable as entropy then we can't escape it and any system not built around greed will fail!

Except studies by sociologists and anthropologists disagree that there is such a thing as fundamental human nature. If anything we tend towards altruism. People that share resources and work together have a better chance at surviving and improving their condition than those who hoard resources and act for their own self interest. We'd be very different as a species without our ability to socialize and work together towards our mutual survival.

Capitalism is merely one system. And with the current prospects of this tech displacing thousands of jobs and no other jobs to replace them enough of the current capitalist system won't be sufficient for supporting us in the future. We need to change parts of the system or replace it entirely with something better.

[kranke155]

I think universal food and shelter based off an AI tax seems pretty workable.

Communism failed, but having capitalism without poverty is doable. On some scale some European countries have virtually eliminated poverty. They still have working economies.

Could we do that for a lot of the world using AI and automation? If we reduce the cost of food and shelter from 10-20% to 3-5% of the economy, why not?