9 ms·
In a world where abundance reigns, the old structures and the leaders who champion them fade into obsolescence. The energy that once went into seeking more begi
by survirtual 3y ago
In a world where abundance reigns, the old structures and the leaders who champion them fade into obsolescence. The energy that once went into seeking more begins to flow into sharing, nurturing, and sustaining. In this transformed landscape, resource hoarding and centralized control are not just out of place; they become barriers to the collective human journey toward wisdom and spiritual fulfillment.
When everyone's basic needs are met effortlessly, the focus of life shifts from surviving to thriving, from acquiring to becoming. In such a world, market mechanisms and venture capital don't just lose relevance; they begin to feel like vestiges of an era defined by limitations that no longer exist. The skills once lauded for amassing resources lose their sheen when the quest becomes one of meaning, connection, and collective wellbeing.
The hearts and minds of people turn toward unlocking human potential, fostering creativity, and deepening relationships. In this new reality, leaders who can guide us toward spiritual and emotional enrichment will supersede those who have mastered the art of material accumulation.
In this context, the prominence of individuals like Andreessen, along with constructs such as markets and money, would naturally diminish into insignificance. The irony lies in the fact that such a manifesto would even be conceived, indicating a profound disconnect from the emergent realities of a post-scarcity world.
- jpadkins 3y agoreally well written reply, much I agree with. Except one part about markets. I think even in the Age of Abundance, market forces will still be present. But I think they will be more like how trees grow to the light, or roots to the water. We will still need signals for efficiency and regrowth. Hard to say the same about money. I can't see a world without value, and I can't comprehend a system with value but no means to exchange value (money).
- survirtual 3y agoIn envisioning a future landscape, I see energy—both its generation and consumption—as well as human attention serving as the core currencies of value. These measures transcend the limitations of material wealth, opening avenues for a more holistic understanding of worth. The question of whether this will manifest as a 'market' is less clear, but what is certain is that it would be fundamentally distinct from the systems we navigate today. The incentives driving such an ecosystem would be radically different, to the extent that calling it a market or associating it with money, as we currently understand them, would likely be a misnomer. In this envisioned system, the nature of transactions could also change fundamentally. Currently, transactions are exchanges that often end relationships; you pay for a good, receive it, and both parties move on. In a framework centered on energy and attention, transactions could become cyclical or ongoing, fostering long-term relationships and community engagement. This extends the concept of "value" beyond one-off exchanges into a more interconnected, perhaps even symbiotic, system. Just some thoughts from a nobody on a tiny glowing screen.
- tsunamifury 3y agoLLMs already radically change the attention economy
- zaphar 3y agoI don't understand why people find this idea compelling. I find it without any supporting evidence that this is how it would turn out. They hypothesis is unproven and doesn't match my own observed anecdata around how people function. Yet it seems like everytime it comes up everyone thinks it's obvious. I just fundamentally don't think a post scarcity society functions even remotely the way everyone else seems to think it would.
- nradov 3y agoThe things which people really want will never be abundant. Social status is a zero-sum game.
- tsunamifury 3y agoStatus driven monkeys fighting over tree position That’s why we got Facebook over jet packs. That’s what we are. We need to accept it
- nradov 3y agoWe have jet packs. You can buy one if you want, although it isn't very practical. https://gravity.co/ https://gravity.co/ Status is one of the main factors that drives innovation.
- tsunamifury 3y agoWoosh…
- semitones 3y agoIt seems that you are describing a utopia, where there are no more problems to solve, other than the purpose of our own existence, and the reconciliation of our mortality in our minds. Although I do think that we can get to a point where things are pretty damn good, perhaps even as good as you describe, I don't think that humans' desire for growth and appetite for problem solving will be quenched. Even if all of our basic and supra-basic needs were met, we would become preoccupied with preserving ourselves from extraterrestrial threats - asteroids, our sun burning out, our earth not being able to permanently sustain us in one way or another, etc. If that's the case, then the desire for planetary defense and intergalactic travel will ensure that techno-capatalist forces are alive and well. If you are talking about a society that has gotten past that point already, then all bets are off as to what their lives are like.
- survirtual 3y agoWhile the term 'utopia' might imply a final state of perfection, what I describe is more akin to an inevitable transformation, one that you can almost sense unfolding around us. Machine intelligence is advancing at an unprecedented pace, economic landscapes are shifting, and sociopolitical tensions are reaching critical points. This is not the end of a journey but a metamorphosis toward a different way of life. Unlike a utopia, which suggests a static state where all problems are solved, this new paradigm acknowledges the insatiable human drive for growth and problem-solving. It doesn't eliminate challenges; it redefines them. In a world where our basic and even our complex needs are met, our focus would naturally shift to grander scales—planetary defense, interstellar travel, and even the quest for existential understanding. However, the metrics of value and systems of exchange that govern this new reality would be fundamentally different, rendering current techno-capitalist forces obsolete in their traditional forms.
- heavyset_go 3y agoOne could call liberal democracy a utopia, when compared to feudalism that preceded it. There will always be problems to solve, what the OP is describing is not the absence of problems, but the evolution of social and economic relations in the same way capitalism was the evolution of social and economic relations from feudalism.
- throwaway9274 3y agoWe do not live in a post-scarcity world. Every day people get up, enforce the laws, execute the national defense, bury themselves up to their elbows in humans’ abdomens to heal their broken bodies, and pick your turnips. The world is not self-executing. Market mechanisms coordinate that activity by transmitting information through the price signal. In their absence, the material abundance you mistake for post-scarcity would quickly collapse.
- happytiger 3y agoWhy use a throwaway to say that? It’s just truth in the current system, and the current system is the most abundant we’ve had for any significant duration.
- cma 3y ago> Every day people get up, [...] and pick your turnips. There are turnip harvesting machines in wide use: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RyAOQtnOJh4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RyAOQtnOJh4
- helboi4 3y agoWe are already at a point where no human needs to be starving on this earth. Most jobs are useless and unemployment is a constant necessity of the system we live under that benefits elites yet we have all been brainwashed to view unemployed people as the scourge of society rather than the necessary victims of an unequal system. Social change is what creates better living standards, not technological change. Both help, but you can have technological advancement without significant social advancement and that's bad.