4 ms·

I'm prepared to believe that this writer is smart and serious and just makes consistently unfortunate style choices. But at some point, if you insist on walking

• rdl 14y ago
  I think the relevant thing is that the "option C" he dismisses out of hand is actually what we're getting: <blockquote> Beyond the creepy A and B, all solutions to the problem involve a State which compels, through economic or other means (it hardly matters), humans who are not economically productive to submit to work or some simulation thereof. For instance, especially with the Oculus Rift, technology is beginning to present us with a Solution C, which combines physical imprisonment with virtual enrichment. It's not clear what a life-scale virtual environment would consist of, but it would surely involve work or something like it. I don't find Solution C particularly creepy, but I may be alone in this. It is certainly less creepy than A or B. I suspect that if it was done right, the customers would vastly prefer it to their present vile circumstances. But I also suspect it will never happen. </blockquote> That sounds like the life of virtually everyone on HN. Some rival goods are in shorter supply even for relative winners than they were in the past (even the relatively rich in the Bay Area don't have very nice houses; a $10mm house in Hillsborough is nice, but it's essentially a $1.5mm house elsewhere.) We'll put more and more value into information goods and services, relative to a much more slowly growing physical economy.