Post-AGI Economics II―'Don't just seize the means of production, put them on the blockchain!'

WRITING STUFF

[GigaCrafty]

The power elite won’t go down without a fight. Cyberpunk society here we come😎

[SzczepanBentyn]

Hey David. I consider myself somewhat an expert in tokenomics and DAOs. And as much as I agree with you on most issues I didn't see you address the most important one, which is incentives. People will still be greedy, lazy and willing to harm others to get more wealth - that seems like an evolutionary mechanisms. Planning for the postAGI economy I think we should start with incentives. I would love to be a part of this discussion.

[The-Spondy-School]

The last great symbiosis began around 600 million years ago when digestive microorganisms joined forces with single cell organisms to create a more successful existence for both of them. Today's result of that marriage reveals a system wherein our digestive/ intestinal bugs outnumber our body cells by about 10 to 1, giving us an existence we could never have imagined. I use this to point out a bit of curious thinking -- that being the relationship between ai and humans. There's too much focus on us versus them, as opposed to considering, what could be the next greatest symbiosis in the history of humans. If ai's get to do all the fun stuff and humans are sidelined to watch and collect stipends, it won't be much fun for humans -- at least for me. On the other hand, the more humans promote the next (hopefully) grand symbiosis of fully merging the growing wonders of ai directly into them the more the symbiotic merger of ai / humans can more greatly enjoy life. Who would not like to have the eyesight of an eagle? Or the running capacity of a cheetah? Or the ability to communicate telepathically, if so desired? Or be able to live for as long as you choose in a healthy way? Through such a grand symbiosis, all of that is possible. So enough with the us vs them shit. Let's do a little more thinking about a grander WE.

[robynwyrick]

Claim: "Technology always creates new jobs"
Retort: "That is not a law. That is an observation of the past. But even if it does create new demand for labor there is no reason to assume that that new labor must be done by a human."
Spot on. No notes.

[Köennig]

One point to consider is that with the greater number and general abilities of robots, humans won't need each other as much anymore, at least in reference to labor, resource handling and security. The reason we went from monarchy to democracy is that as kingdoms grew larger, the dependency of the monarchs on it's people also increased. They depended on the loyalty of the army to keep carrying out it's orders and keep it safe, depended on common people to work the lands and handle commerce. The moment people unite in revolt, it's over. But imagine a king with a thousand ever loyal robots to make it's security, to farm his lands, build it's properties. What's the limit on his power? Would it give any consideration for common folk? Essential for our current social contract is that we need each other, no matter the how rich or poor, for almost everything. And that goes even for billionaires, for now. When robots become able to put up as much work as humans, what will hold the upper-classes in a social contract with the very people they look down upon?

[duytdl]

I notice you work with a lot of good faith mindset. You don't include bad actors into your predictions. The only thing I'm sure of is AI will be weaponized by those in power, the corrupt/stupid-greedy, and those who just wanna resist it for the sake of it. You gotta think of how the landscape will unfold due to _their_ actions. Squeaky wheel gets the grease

[korteksvisceralzen]

Absolutely love videos like this that seek to analyze society at a deep level and propose alternatives. Personally agree we need more options other than simply maximizing profit at the cost of all other interests.

[ct]

What about private ownership of production, like Universal Basic Productivity (UBP) (so AGI/ ASI, robots, Infrastructure, automation) that is somewhat equally distributed? Like Altmans idea of universal basic compute, where everybody owns an equal part of the global compute. That way you would still have a capitalist system with autonomy and economic agency without the need to do anything yourself (post labor), even the management over your part of production could be delegated to an AI. As an oversimplified example, I let my robots farm olives on the field and you let your robots produce wine, then we (our robots) exchange wine for olives at the market or sell them. Non of us would have to go to the field, at the same time economic agency would be given, and somewhat equally distributed. UBI and UBS (universal basic services) might still exist in parallel to UBP as a social security measure. Plus simultaneously likely prices would drop for the most part significantly as the result of automation.

[Riflezne]

This idea of collective ownership won't be a thing, There's no way. The labor force will be owned by corporations, and you'll see more of a push for depopulation.. let's be honest. We can all see it. Also, prepare for land to be forcefully taken from you for " responsible resource management "

[historicallyintriguing-qp]

Thank you for being this smart and not part of the problem. I am cautiously optimistic about the solutions you propose.

[particle_wave]

How is collective ownership any different than publicly traded companies on the stock market? You mention Blackrock being the modern Standard Oil, but that was a private company. Blackrock is a public company. Anyone can buy stock in Blackrock. How would collective ownership be any different than just owning publically traded stock? Would it be free and unavailable to buy or sell?
And besides that, how does the transition happen? Does the government have to buy out all these companies to then give collective ownership to citizens? Is investing even possible in the future you describe? Would the only way of using money to make more money just be to loan it out?

[Thebastianmoreton]

Power to the people! This is one of the best I’ve heard. We need to understand that this is changing, capitalism is not taking us anywhere from here!

[MrSeadawg]

This is probably the best assessment and work you have done to date.

[rip]

We should not only prioritize collectivism and decentralization, we should reject rulership and embrace anarchism.

[djahandrews]

Wow, David's vision for a post-AGI economy is truly mind-blowing. It's easy to get caught up in the challenges and potential pitfalls, but we can't lose sight of the incredible opportunity we have to reshape our world. The future isn't set in stone – it's up to us to mold it. We don't have to wait for governments or corporations to lead the way. Each of us can start small, whether it's learning about blockchain, experimenting with AI tools, or just having conversations about these ideas with friends and family. Every action we take, every mind we open, is a step towards that brighter future. Let's not be passive observers in this revolution. We have the power to be the architects of our own destiny. It's time to dream big, take risks, and build the world we want to live in. Who's with me?

[JulioMacarena]

Had stopped watching you, DS. Clicked on this out of curiosity - some of the most logical and useful stuff I've heard you say. Nice one.

[antoine.-]

Amazing work Dave, that's a massive contribution you're doing for our future

[andreagrey]

I want to thank you for the video. I am hopeful that much of the ideas you discussed will be implemented as a natural progression to current governing models. The one area that is so often overlooked I would like you to consider. This is the reality that the majority doesn't always have the best interest of the minority in mind when making decisions. It would be far too easy for a majority to cause real harm to immigrants, LGBT persons, other communities, etc. It is important that a majority's power is always limited by the individual's liberty. There can be no peace if you do not have absolute liberty. This means that the only check on your own liberty is that it cannot remove the liberty of another. Right now many minority groups rely on representation to keep them from suffering at the hand of the majority.

[Judep]

This is a great video. Your strengths are definitely in synthesising a broad spectrum of theories and ideas and re-presenting that in ways that are applicable to the potential AI scenarios.

[Vlado]

There is little hope of transitioning the current economic and political systems without drastic, potentially painful changes that could cause widespread suffering. Humanity has consistently struggled to organize itself in a way that ensures fair and equal distribution of resources. This leads me to believe that the global elite may have already initiated a process aimed at removing or transforming humanity as a factor in these future systems.