[Vivtek]

You ignore them. All prices will fall - including the prices of robots. (3D printers are doing this right now.) So you build a decentralized economy - which will happen no matter what we do - and the "owners" become, well, everybody.

[marvin]

I don't think this is going to play out the way you describe it. It is a tempting scenario, but just look at the Internet. The Internet is the biggest equalizer in world history. Everyone can say anything to anyone who has an Internet connection. Billions of people directly connected to each other.

And what has happened? Yes, everyone can reach everyone, and everyone is equal, _in principle_. But the removal of competitive barriers makes the winner-take-all effect ("power-law") is stronger than it has been in _any_ context, ever. As robotics becomes more prevalent, this will happen in the physical world as well. The income disparity between the richest and the average will become a lot larger.

I am not sure that this in itself is a problem, though. But it is essential that we are able to develop the political and social innovations required to ensure that _power_ doesn't go along with money. Because the money distribution will be more lopsided than at any other point in human history.

[Vivtek]

The winner-take-all effect is not stronger than ever. I challenge you to prove to me that somebody has access to all the information and I don't. I grew up in the middle of nowhere and I know the world is at my doorstep now.

Moreover, I can actually find them and communicate with them now - growing up, I simply couldn't. I was a science-fiction fan and didn't even know there was such a thing as fandom. Now, almost automatically, I'm a Facebook friend with one of my early favorite authors (becoming an actual friend with time), I talk to publishers and fellow fans on a regular basis - they exist. They are part of my community. There is no winner-take-all effect at all, and in fact, I think I probably don't even know what you mean by it.

The income disparity simply won't matter. Money won't matter (much). Clearly it'll matter if you want to travel, for example, or buy something you can't get locally - but there will be a whole lot more available locally.

[marvin]

Here is an example of the winner-take-all effect as applied to Internet companies. The effect is very real, and it becomes more pronounced the more powerful our technologies become.

http://www.appolicious.com/tech/articles/9654-top-20-percent...

[icebraining]

So they have almost all the share, of a slice of a small market in the whole Internet. Hardly winner takes all.

Also, that informal survey asked for the total of income, so it's heavily biased towards companies which started earlier.

[Vivtek]

I'll grant you the pathological nature of the App Store, but I don't agree that that's characteristic of the Internet as a whole. The house always wins over there.

[eli_gottlieb]

Then we hit the "Four Futures" problem, in which we must decide whether to institute draconian intellectual-property regimes to keep capitalism standing, or abolish capitalism in acknowledgement of the absurdity of trying to extract surplus-value from Replicators.

http://jacobinmag.com/2011/12/four-futures/