I don’t think we’re going to see an era of abundance.

Reddit r/singularity News
agi economic-displacement future-of-work ai-society labor-market opinion

Summary

A pro-AI commenter argues that AGI will not produce an era of abundance but instead render roughly 90% of humanity economically useless and resource-draining, potentially triggering large-scale global conflict as humans are outcompeted on labor.

Please read the entire post before upvoting, downvoting, or commenting. I’m pro-AI, and I’m not a decelerationist. The thing is, I don’t think we’re going to see an era of abundance. I think at least 90% of humanity will become not only economically useless but also a burden to society. People will no longer produce anything while still consuming resources. And if they suddenly have at least 40 extra hours of free time per week, they’ll have more time to contemplate their situation, grow resentful, rebel, or have more children, who will, in turn, consume even more resources. If we achieve AGI, I think we will face global conflict on an unimaginable scale. No one needs billions of people when AGI can perform their jobs better, faster, and more cheaply.
Original Article

Similar Articles

Can AGI replace people?

Reddit r/AI_Agents

The article explores how artificial general intelligence replacing human labor could trigger global economic and social changes, such as the end of traditional capitalism and the need for systems like unconditional basic income.

The most bullish AI outcome might be “not AGI”

Reddit r/artificial

The author argues that the most bullish AI investment scenario may not be full AGI, but rather extremely capable non-AGI AI that integrates into the economy without disrupting capitalism or society.

What remains scarce after AGI? (67 minute read)

TLDR AI

An interview with economists Alex Imas and Phil Trammell discussing the economic implications of AGI, including what will remain scarce, how to tax and redistribute AI-generated wealth, and potential inequality scenarios.