> I'm finding it difficult to believe this. Pay attention to the whole sentence, especially the last section : "... based on the value of human labor." It's

> I'm finding it difficult to believe this. Pay attention to the whole sentence, especially the last section : "... based on the value of human labor." It's not that I'm ruling out capitalism as the outcome. I'm simply ruling out the combined JOINT possibility of capitalism COMBINED WITH human labor remaining the base resource within it. If robotics is going in the direction I expect there will simply be no jobs left that will be done more efficiently by humans than by machines. (ie that robots will match or exceed the robustness, flexibility and cost efficiency of all biology based life forms through breakthroughs in either nanotech or by simply using organic chemistry, DNA, etc to build the robots). Why pay even $1/day for a human to do a job when a robot can do it for $1/week? Also, such a capitalist system will almost certainly lead to AGI's becoming increasingly like a new life form, as capitalism between AGI's introduce a Darwinian selection pressure. That will make it hard even for the 100 richest people to retain permanent control. IF humanity is to survive (for at least a few thousand more years, not just the next 100), we either need some way to ensure alignment. And to do that, we have to make sure that AGI's that optimize resource-control-seeking behaviours have an advantage over those who don't. We may even have to define some level of sophistication where further development is completly halted. At least until we find ways for humans to merge with them in a way that allows us (at least some of us) to retain our humanity.