3 ms·

The fictional automated business may cost tens of billions of dollars to build. That means almost no one, not literally anyone, can create it. If a small group

The fictional automated business may cost tens of billions of dollars to build. That means almost no one, not literally anyone, can create it. If a small group of giant conglomerates are the only companies wealthy enough to build these automated factories, then there's no competition to drive down prices, and no automatic path to a post-scarcity society. Instead, it's the dystopia ryandrake described.

Ajedi32 2y ago
> If a small group of giant conglomerates are the only companies wealthy enough to build these automated factories So AI can build everything except the factory itself? Sounds like there's still a need for human labor. And if the opposite is true and AI can build the factory, then it's not going to "cost tens of billions of dollars to build"; the factory will be just as cheap as the goods its producing. Literally everyone could have their own factory.
- mewpmewp2 2y ago
  Maybe the resources, materials and land is the constraint here. So whoever builds the first one will be able to quickly expand, buy more land and solidify their lead. Land is likely what would cost billions in this specific scenario. If you don't have land or materials then there is nothing your AI can do, because it doesn't have anything to build things from.
  - kwere 2y ago
    high tech "machinery" is the constraint for most capital intensive businesses
  - Ajedi32 2y ago
    I do think in the case where a company is benefiting from the exploitation of limited natural resources (like land) that don't naturally belong to any one person, imposing a tax on that does make sense. There was a podcast I listened to on this subject "The Plunder of the Commons" which I found really interesting. [1] That said, we're a long ways away from reaching the point where literally not having anywhere left on the planet to build becomes your primary obstacle to starting a business. [1]: https://politicalorphanage.libsyn.com/the-plunder-of-the-commons https://politicalorphanage.libsyn.com/the-plunder-of-the-com...
hgomersall 2y ago
Or the state will do it.

Ajedi32 2y ago

> If a small group of giant conglomerates are the only companies wealthy enough to build these automated factories So AI can build everything except the factory itself? Sounds like there's still a need for human labor. And if the opposite is true and AI can build the factory, then it's not going to "cost tens of billions of dollars to build"; the factory will be just as cheap as the goods its producing. Literally everyone could have their own factory.

mewpmewp2 2y ago
Maybe the resources, materials and land is the constraint here. So whoever builds the first one will be able to quickly expand, buy more land and solidify their lead. Land is likely what would cost billions in this specific scenario. If you don't have land or materials then there is nothing your AI can do, because it doesn't have anything to build things from.
- kwere 2y ago
  high tech "machinery" is the constraint for most capital intensive businesses
- Ajedi32 2y ago
  I do think in the case where a company is benefiting from the exploitation of limited natural resources (like land) that don't naturally belong to any one person, imposing a tax on that does make sense. There was a podcast I listened to on this subject "The Plunder of the Commons" which I found really interesting. [1] That said, we're a long ways away from reaching the point where literally not having anywhere left on the planet to build becomes your primary obstacle to starting a business. [1]: https://politicalorphanage.libsyn.com/the-plunder-of-the-commons https://politicalorphanage.libsyn.com/the-plunder-of-the-com...

hgomersall 2y ago

Or the state will do it.