It superficially resembles the Marxist account of the bourgeoisie as responsible for their own downfall ("what the Bourgeoisie therefore produces, above all, ar

It superficially resembles the Marxist account of the bourgeoisie as responsible for their own downfall ("what the Bourgeoisie therefore produces, above all, are its own grave diggers"), but he ascribes it more to a philanthropic change of heart or concern about their legacy. > I think it's a combination of both embarrassment and enlightened self-interest that this class — several rungs above my own — is trying to make sure it does not sow the seeds of a highly destructive societal collapse, and I believe I have seen an actual personal transformation in many of the leading thinkers among the technologists, where they have come to care deeply about the effects of their work. Few of them want to be remembered as job killers who destroyed the gains that have accumulated since the Industrial Revolution. > So I think that in terms of wanting to leave a socially positive legacy, many of them are motivated to innovate through concepts like universal basic income, finding that Washington is as bereft of new ideas in social terms as it is of new technological ones. I mean the entire idea is bullshit to me. UBI is not socialist and Elon Musk talking about UBI is poor evidence of any sensitivity to the plight of workers or even recognition that things will end badly for them if we stay on course by the bourgeoisie at large. Fighting the UAW yet talking about UBI isn't being a "woke billionaire" or something, that's absurd.