3 ms·

I am genuinely mystified that you think this is an adequate response to my basic point. The economy cannot be sustained this way. This scenario would almost imm

I am genuinely mystified that you think this is an adequate response to my basic point. The economy cannot be sustained this way. This scenario would almost immediately lead to a collapse.

riku_iki 2y ago
why do you think it will lead to collapse exactly?
- farts_mckensy 2y ago
  The level of wealth concentration you are suggesting is impossible to sustain. History shows that when wealth inequality gets to a certain point, it leads either to a revolution or a total collapse of that society. The economy cannot be sustained on the demand of a small handful of wealthy people. At a certain point, you either get a depression or hyperinflation depending on how the powers that be react to the crisis. In either case, the wealthy will have no leverage to incentivize people to do their bidding. If your argument is, they'll just get AI to do their bidding, you have to keep in mind that "there is no moat." Outside of the ideological sphere, there is nothing that essentially ties the wealthy to the data centers and resources required to run these machines.
  - riku_iki 2y ago
    History absolutely shows that multiple empires where power/wealth was concentrated in hands of few people sustained for hundreds years. Revolts could be successful or not successful, with tech advancements in suppression (large scale surveillance, weaponry, various strike drones) chances of population to strike back become smaller. Economy could totally be built around demand and wishes of super-rich, because human's greed and desires are infinite, new emperor may decide to build giant temple, and here you have multi-trillion economy how to make it running.
    - farts_mckensy 2y ago
      History does not show that. Not at the levels of concentration we're talking about. The wealthy cannot maintain control over this technology. Again, there is no moat.
      - HeatrayEnjoyer 2y ago
        The moat will be "I created the best/most killer robots first and used them to destroy/oppress everyone else."
        farts_mckensy 2y ago
        This the the real world, not some anime you beat off to.
        HeatrayEnjoyer 2y ago
        Do you have a constructive point to make? Unless you don't expect weaponized robots to ever be constructed, I can't see how this isn't an obvious conclusion
        farts_mckensy 2y ago
        I already made the point. There is no moat. You cannot keep that technology for yourself. Much like nuclear technology. Others will develop it in tandem, and we'll reach an equilibrium.
        riku_iki 2y ago
        99% of population absolutely can't build high quality LLMs or/and agents. Not talking about network effect: those who can build still need to find the way to sell those LLMs and agents. There is significant moat.
        HeatrayEnjoyer 2y ago

I am genuinely mystified that you think this is an adequate response to my basic point. The economy cannot be sustained this way. This scenario would almost immediately lead to a collapse.

riku_iki 2y ago

why do you think it will lead to collapse exactly?

farts_mckensy 2y ago
The level of wealth concentration you are suggesting is impossible to sustain. History shows that when wealth inequality gets to a certain point, it leads either to a revolution or a total collapse of that society. The economy cannot be sustained on the demand of a small handful of wealthy people. At a certain point, you either get a depression or hyperinflation depending on how the powers that be react to the crisis. In either case, the wealthy will have no leverage to incentivize people to do their bidding. If your argument is, they'll just get AI to do their bidding, you have to keep in mind that "there is no moat." Outside of the ideological sphere, there is nothing that essentially ties the wealthy to the data centers and resources required to run these machines.
- riku_iki 2y ago
  History absolutely shows that multiple empires where power/wealth was concentrated in hands of few people sustained for hundreds years. Revolts could be successful or not successful, with tech advancements in suppression (large scale surveillance, weaponry, various strike drones) chances of population to strike back become smaller. Economy could totally be built around demand and wishes of super-rich, because human's greed and desires are infinite, new emperor may decide to build giant temple, and here you have multi-trillion economy how to make it running.
  - farts_mckensy 2y ago
    History does not show that. Not at the levels of concentration we're talking about. The wealthy cannot maintain control over this technology. Again, there is no moat.
    - HeatrayEnjoyer 2y ago
      The moat will be "I created the best/most killer robots first and used them to destroy/oppress everyone else."
      - farts_mckensy 2y ago
        This the the real world, not some anime you beat off to.
        HeatrayEnjoyer 2y ago
        Do you have a constructive point to make? Unless you don't expect weaponized robots to ever be constructed, I can't see how this isn't an obvious conclusion
        farts_mckensy 2y ago
        I already made the point. There is no moat. You cannot keep that technology for yourself. Much like nuclear technology. Others will develop it in tandem, and we'll reach an equilibrium.
        riku_iki 2y ago
        99% of population absolutely can't build high quality LLMs or/and agents. Not talking about network effect: those who can build still need to find the way to sell those LLMs and agents. There is significant moat.
        HeatrayEnjoyer 2y ago