To quote Bill Clinton, "it's the economy, stupid". Or, rather, it's economics. AGI can go one of two ways in humanity's future: 1. We all need to work less bec

To quote Bill Clinton, "it's the economy, stupid". Or, rather, it's economics. AGI can go one of two ways in humanity's future: 1. We all need to work less because so many menial tasks are automated. We get more leisure time. Fewer than half of us probably have to work at all yet we all benefit to varying degrees by sharing in the rewards; or 2. The decreasing size of the required labor pool is used to further suppress wages and get more unpaid work from employees. Real wages plummet. Wealth inequality continues to skyrocket. There's a permanent underclass of people who will never work. They're given just enough to prevent putting heads on pikes. It's a dystopian future. Likely most of us won't own anything. We'll live in worker housing on the estates of the ultra-wealthy for what remaining tasks can't be automated. This is neofeudalism. Which do you think is more likely? More to the point, which way we go is a matter of the organization of the economy. A company like OpenAI simply cannot and will not bring up positive outcomes for the country or world at large. Just like the fable of the scorpion and the frog [1], it's in the nature of companies to concentrate wealth in the hands of a few. We have a model for what works: the Wikimedia Foundation. Put another way: the only sustainable path is for the workers to own the means of production. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Scorpion_and_the_Frog https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Scorpion_and_the_Frog