> We already produce multiple times more food than what we will actually consume It's funny, your comment seems very naive to me. :) For example, it misses al

> We already produce multiple times more food than what we will actually consume It's funny, your comment seems very naive to me. :) For example, it misses all of the problems subtleties - and so, its potential solutions. Eg: Where are we producing more food than is being consumed? Who is benefitting from it, and who is losing out? Which of these misallocations can be easily solved? How? By examining this issue properly, instead of writing it off as a perennial failure that nothing can be done about, potential modifications appear, ideas form, applications start to be structured. The optimum distribution of food is a solvable problem, it's a great application of AI/ML, and assuming the easiest-to-solve routes can be cheaply identified first, could be a great startup idea requiring a minimal investment in likely mostly communications-based (very cheap) solutions. In the easiest cases resources only need rerouting. In probably the hardest, regulations need changing. Yet, I've witnessed local, underfunded grass-roots organisations actually pull this off. One essentially solved homeless hunger in an area (and contained a bunch of other social issues in the process), simply by going to all local restaurants and grocers, collecting everything they throw out each day, and offering it instead to those in need. Regarding the future, and the potential technological empowerment of such initiatives, AI/ML/automation/robotics - it's all open source, cheap and widely available. I often see interesting projects, or useful learning resources put online by people you might refer to as "the poor". I don't think the idea they can't afford these things pans out. They might end up a couple of generations behind in tech, but that doesn't equal zero participation in the benefits. As for the "elite", they are historically only ever a transient force, eventually eliminated by the gross unpalatability of their continuing excess. Relying on their continued dominance doesn't just strike me as exactly what they'd wish us to do, it also - given the endlessly-repeating historical precedent - seems foolish.