| Just because something is economically unnecessary doesn't mean it's politically powerless. That's a contradiction. Of course, from Super PACs to agenda-setting, it's fundamentally a game that favors the capitalist side. Historically, ruling classes often maintain power without directly producing anything themselves. But does that mean this internal unease will persist forever? Look at the MAGA base right now. The vast majority of them are poor. They vote based on their communal religious beliefs and their sense of community. The MAGA support base is demonstrably poor, yet they still wield influence. And there's an internal contradiction within the text: -AI CEOs follow the orders of new owners. -Superintelligent AI has no reason to obey humans. These two statements contradict each other. If superintelligent AI has broken free from human control, why would it follow its owner's orders? And I'm also curious about the assumption that AI wouldn't be better than humans at 'farming' us. So if superintelligent AI decides humans are bad, it might exterminate us. But what if it decides it needs humans and starts 'farming' us instead? And I wonder whether superintelligent AI would actually find conversation with humans boring. Humans and AI are obviously different species. One is made of organic matter, the other inorganic. A person with a biological body and an AI with an inorganic body will be different. Whether AI will observe this difference or deem it meaningless, I think it's still hard to judge. And fast decisions aren't always the answer. Take infrastructure as an example. New York's boiler infrastructure isn't very efficient. But it was once a cutting-edge system. In other words, it was installed as the first advanced system of its time, but once its flaws were discovered, the infrastructure became difficult to replace. That's why cities developed later often have better infrastructure efficiency. Take the East as another example. Japan introduced railways and power grids first, so there are aging costs where the infrastructure can't keep up with newer systems. Setting aside the narrow-gauge rail issue, take the most obvious example: electricity. Japan's 110V system was innovative at the time, but it ended up causing problems with EV charging, it's aging, and transmission efficiency is low. In the end, you can't say that rushing into decisions is always the right call. |