I think he has a great point that the value a person creates is not easily compensated in an information economy. Right now the information economy makes up les

I think he has a great point that the value a person creates is not easily compensated in an information economy. Right now the information economy makes up less than 5% of the total in the U.S. http://dl.dropbox.com/u/9632169/EconomicCensus2007.html http://dl.dropbox.com/u/9632169/EconomicCensus2007.html from http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/SAFFEconFacts?_event=&geo_id=01000US&_geoContext=01000US&_street=&_county=&_cityTown=&_state=&_zip=&_lang=en&_sse=on&ActiveGeoDiv=&_useEV=&pctxt=fph&pgsl=010&_submenuId=business_1&ds_name=&_ci_nbr=&qr_name=&reg=&_keyword=&_industry= http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/SAFFEconFacts?_event=&#... So advertising for the other sectors in the economy works well to support most of the information sector right now. What happens as those other sectors become more automated though? The smaller and smaller amount of people in charge of those sectors will become disproportionately compensated for the value they create. This is already happening in Wall Street for example. So we're going to need to find some way to compensate people for their digital contributions to things like open source, online communities like this, and other informational public goods or we'll be left relying on the government and/or super rich to distribute the abundance of wealth. Neither of which sound very appealing to me.