| >AI simply does all the jobs we currently have? Not really. It would be good at doing generic, well-defined tasks but bad at doing specialized, novel tasks. You would still need some humans in the loop to get to the bottom of niche problems. I agree that it would still go to hell without some type of Georgism or UBI or socialism. I agree that wealth will transfer to companies that control industrial means of production (like 3M or mining companies or intel or something), but it will also transfer out of companies whose moat is based on control of human capital (like accounting, software development, and law). I think that even before AI, we are already seeing this sort of "land is everything" economy. Physical labor has largely been automated in the industrial revolution. Intellectual labor has been displaced not by newfangled AI mechanisms, but by information storage mediums and general pre-AI automation. If you are an artist, you are competing with all of the art that came before you. If you are an engineer, you are reinventing the wheel working on some sort of project that, if open sourced, would only need to be done once. A major sense in which AI eliminates jobs is by acting as a bypass for copyright, it allows you to plausibly make a near-copy of something without a license. There is simply not an infinite amount of demand in the economy for intellectual labor. The thing that destroys the world as we know it is not so much AI, but information sharing and de-duplication of work. Open source would have destroyed the economy if AI didn't. So everyone is working in the service sector now, it's unsustainable. Property prices keep going up, fertility rate keeps going down. |