> there’s a lot of back-of-the-envelope math in this post and I wonder what the real math looks like. There's already quite a bit of academic research and publ

> there’s a lot of back-of-the-envelope math in this post and I wonder what the real math looks like. There's already quite a bit of academic research and published papers doing the real math. At places like MIT and Oxford. Of course it's not hard to poke holes in models and analyses about future scenarios that far off. But people are working on it seriously and it can be interesting to read about. Maybe a coincidence, just 2 weeks ago MIT's Future of People Conference was about "Renaissance 2.0" and how "science and technology impact the human body, mind, and society in the 21st century". http://mitsloan.mit.edu/newsroom/press-releases/inaugural-mit-future-of-people-conference-to-explore-how-science-and-technology-will-shape-the-body-mind-and-spirit/ http://mitsloan.mit.edu/newsroom/press-releases/inaugural-mi... If one looks into the research and the math some major issues stand out. The math isn't very difficult, but stuff like modeling intertemporal choices become really problematic. If there will be paradigm shifts in society, which way might they go and how big a shift is likely. These questions have lead into some unexpected directions like neuroscientists studying brain responses to various values and rewards, trying to understand how society's future decisions/views might evolve. > Are we selling with a handful of robot-inventing billionaires surrounded by masses of poor? Sometimes it sounds like it. Another example: Price and demand expectations adjustments under UBI. Is there a real difference between a UBI of $11k vs $55k if prices adjust? And is there a real difference between scenario 1: UBI of $11K + a group of deca-billionaires or scenario 2: UBI of $55k + a group of deca-billionaires? Arguably both are "billionaires surrounded by masses of poor". Really important to this discussion is the real math is when you start to discount democratized technology. Briefly: there's no law against the next kid making her/his own robot in their college dorm room. So trying to advocate one's ideas for UBI against a future of "robot-inventing billionaires" having some monopolized stake to future technology and the wealth that comes with is myth-making and a bit of intellectual dishonesty. I'm glad UBI is finally being talking about. I know YC and Sam have also been thinking about UBI as well. Hopefully we get these robots in our lifetimes, that part sounds cool. Links to Oxford maybe of interest: http://www.inet.ox.ac.uk/ http://www.inet.ox.ac.uk/ https://www.fhi.ox.ac.uk/ https://www.fhi.ox.ac.uk/