Post-AI Abundance

[omenswap]

Elon Musk stated that in the next decade, AI will have matured to a level that work becomes unnecessary.

And there was a time every new machine invented had an agenda to liberate you.

The loom, the motor, the computer.

Economic output always went up.

However, you ended up having a smaller apartment with just a faster phone.

Now comes AI. And with it come some intriguing concepts.

Universal basic income.

Abundance.

"A world in which money is obselete."

Elon is describing your future.

He is not describing his.

Observe he never says he will stop working. He says YOU will.

Because there is a difference between a man who owns the machine and a man who is replaced by it.

Abundance is not a technology problem.

It was never a technology problem.

We already produce more food than every human being on this planet can eat. Millions still go hungry.

There are more empty homes than homeless people in almost every rich country on earth. People still sleep outside.

Production was solved a century ago.

Distribution was not, because distribution was never broken. It is working exactly as intended.

Scarcity is not a leftover from a poorer past.

Scarcity is a management tool.

A man with three months of savings can quit. But, a man with three days of savings can be told to do anything.

A tired man does not organize. A tired man does not read. A tired man does not think.

He asks what's for dinner and goes to sleep so he can do it again.

He is just living passively.

Poverty keeps you busy. Busy keeps you quiet. Quiet keeps them comfortable.

And when the machine finally arrives and makes your labor worthless, you will not be handed abundance.

You will be handed an allowance.

They will call it a dividend, universal, generous.

Ask yourself the only question that matters.

Who owns the machine?

Because abundance does not distribute itself. It flows to whoever holds the property rights, and it has done so every single time.

Waiting for it to trickle down is a religion with worse odds than the ones you already left.

They are not going to free you.

No conqueror in history has ever freed people out of generosity.

Because they are the CONQUEROR.

You will never be granted "abundance."

That would allow you THINK.

I am not going to tell you what to do with this information.

You already know.

BTC

When Elon Musk or other billionaires say shit like this, you need to ask yourself some important questions like:

• Does he have my best interest at heart? (almost certainly, no)
• Does he have a profit motive for making this claim? (yes)
• Does he has a history of making incorrect grandiose predictions about the near future? (ab-so-fucking-lutely)

[X-ray]

Elon Musk stated that in the next decade, AI will have matured to a level that work becomes unnecessary.

This is coming from a guy who said universal healthcare is an entitlement while his companies receive big government subsidies and personally I find small difference between universal healthcare and universal income.

If he keeps saying Medicaid is big money fraud, he'd say the same thing about the big checks from government that he's talking about eventually.

Someone can say a thing and do the opposite which exactly what Elon Musk is.

[Alpha Marine]

Anyway, Elon has also said that in the future we won't be using money because the concept of fiat and cash will be gone. We will only use energy, and then he said Bitcoin is energy. So we can get a hint, but it is not like he was really saying BTC is going to replace cash, or maybe he was, IDK haha. I don't trust his words. I don't even listen to him much. I just follow his plans for the future in technology and what he thinks haha.

He did not say traditional money will be useless. He did not say something else will take the place of money; he said: "money will be useless". Meaning anything that has the form of money will no longer be necessary because, according to him, you can get everything for free.
According to him, AI will do everything for humans, so they won't need money for anything. If he said something else, like Bitcoin will replace traditional fiat money, it would have made a little sense, even though he would have still een wrong, but he said there will be nothing like money at all. That is a very myopic view.

[Moreno233]

Elon Musk stated that in the next decade, AI will have matured to a level that work becomes unnecessary.

This is coming from a guy who said universal healthcare is an entitlement while his companies receive big government subsidies and personally I find small difference between universal healthcare and universal income.

If he keeps saying Medicaid is big money fraud, he'd say the same thing about the big checks from government that he's talking about eventually.

Someone can say a thing and do the opposite which exactly what Elon Musk is.

I watched the interview several times and I saw how he failed to make sense on stage. He could not explain himself well and that makes me feel he was cleverly burying words in mystery. I don't think that Elon Musk will just talk carelessly, he must be driving at something but I'm sure his concept of abundance does not mean that humanity will now live in Eldorado. The obvious meaning of his statement is that they (the rich) may not spend money to get things done as AI powered humanoid would have been fully developed to replace humans in workplaces.

[Numan467]

Elon is a twat.

He can't just do good... (he could but he won't). He has to do an exact amount of evil to compensate for any good he brings to the world, for no other reason than to satisfy his own ego.

There will never be a UBI or overabundance of anything, aside from plastic and bullshit. My outlook for the world is getting worse as the flow of wealth from everybody else to the uber rich continues to accelerate. Why would it stop when its being cheered on by half of America, and hundreds of millions around the globe who were brainwashed into being mouthpieces for our political parties.

Your anger is fair, Elon is describing YOUR future, not his. The xAI owner is not afraid of being replaced by AI.
The UBI doubt is also likely to be right, but for the wrong reasons. Problem is that the political drive is lacking, and UBI fails not because of evil billionaires twisting their mustaches in boardrooms, but because of this. 50 percent of population that needs it opposes it. It is not craziness, it is just really hard to understand.
BlackHatCoiner question remains unanswered — who owns the machine? Dodging to name Elon is a way to avoid the issue. 😄

[legiteum]

He did not say traditional money will be useless. He did not say something else will take the place of money; he said: "money will be useless". Meaning anything that has the form of money will no longer be necessary because, according to him, you can get everything for free.
According to him, AI will do everything for humans, so they won't need money for anything. If he said something else, like Bitcoin will replace traditional fiat money, it would have made a little sense, even though he would have still een wrong, but he said there will be nothing like money at all. That is a very myopic view.

"Myopic"? You are too kind  . It's absolutely stoooopid, and he knows it.

Only a five year old could believe you could just give everybody a trillion dollars like Elon Musk has and then we'd all live like Elon Musk.

As I said in my post above, I think a future where people do not need any money in order to live a very basic (read: very boring) life is quite possible. Today, in most developed countries, you can have zero money at all and still be physically alive. I think that bar will just get higher and higher, with the "free tier" of society getting more comfortable.

But "a world without money" is idiotic.

And UBI is never going to happen since... it doesn't need to happen. Societies will just make enough free stuff available to allow people to live without money if they don't want to earn any in order to have special and rare things that most humans strive for.

In the future, until the end of time, there will be "rich people" and "poor people".

Elon Musk seems to be trying to con people by convincing them they will all be rich, fly around in private jets, date many beautiful women, manipulate the government in any way they please, and so on. That's not how it works--and he knows it.

[nutildah]

Your anger is fair, Elon is describing YOUR future, not his. The xAI owner is not afraid of being replaced by AI.
The UBI doubt is also likely to be right, but for the wrong reasons. Problem is that the political drive is lacking, and UBI fails not because of evil billionaires twisting their mustaches in boardrooms, but because of this. 50 percent of population that needs it opposes it. It is not craziness, it is just really hard to understand.
BlackHatCoiner question remains unanswered — who owns the machine? Dodging to name Elon is a way to avoid the issue. 😄

Haha. Good job. I hope you had a laugh using Grok to defend Elon. Have fun trying to rank up this account.

[Hamza2424]

He did not say traditional money will be useless. He did not say something else will take the place of money; he said: "money will be useless". Meaning anything that has the form of money will no longer be necessary because, according to him, you can get everything for free.
According to him, AI will do everything for humans, so they won't need money for anything. If he said something else, like Bitcoin will replace traditional fiat money, it would have made a little sense, even though he would have still een wrong, but he said there will be nothing like money at all. That is a very myopic view.

Well bro he said

"Well, before that, conventional money will no longer be relevant. Mass & energy will take the place of dollars" So he did said it will be replaced with mass and energy, And before making this statement he said "

That is why Bitcoin is based on energy:

you can issue fake fiat currency, and every government in history has done so, but it is impossible to fake energy"

So basically this was published in the other forum I guess and that's where I came to know about it.

I also don't think he would mean btc by mass and energy but his opinion collides but he also explained the cycle of AI and how the currency won't be relevant with the rise of AI because AI robots would be enough to do all the work. Whatever he knew or his views are for the future, I think btc is going to stay and in the era of AI if quantum won't have direct impact then we are good.

https://threadnavigator.com/thread/2066899992887910548/

[Alpha Marine]

I also don't think he would mean btc by mass and energy but his opinion collides but he also explained the cycle of AI and how the currency won't be relevant with the rise of AI because AI robots would be enough to do all the work. Whatever he knew or his views are for the future, I think btc is going to stay and in the era of AI if quantum won't have direct impact then we are good.

I don't think you watched the interview posted in the OP. You can watch it and skip to the "work is going to be optional" section to hear him say it himself. When asked about taxes, he said there will be no need for that when money will be irrelevant.
Even from the stuff you posted, it is obvious that he means money will be irrelevant. He is not saying something else will take the place of money; he is saying there will be so much energy to an extent that we will basically get everything for free. That is why I say it's a very myopic view because energy is not the only thing needed to make a product.
Take the example of bread used in the link you provided; Grok AI was explaining energy alone, but there are a lot of other things needed for that bread, so how will they get it? Before you require energy to get the bread, you would need flour, sugar, milk, eggs and other necessary flavours, so how will the person baking get these things without money?

And there is also the incentive part. Since "work is optional", meaning people will get everything they want whether they work or not, what would be the incentive for people to work? He is basically describing a communist system, which has never worked.

[dansus021]

Elon Musk previous interview already said that AI is far more dangerous than nuke and this, in my opinion pretty much true. AI today already smart Im using AI and the way AI talk and discussed with DEsigning coding and other stuff I saw on the internet is insane if there is a robot that have brain of AI without token limit that would be crazy.

iF AI evolves to much it will be more dangerous, the general AI that can think a new material, finding cure oh my god there will be no job for white collar worker. When a worker no longer has labor leverage, they lose the ability to bargain. A population living entirely on a centralized UBI allowance isn't 'liberated from work' they are placed on permanent financial probation. If the state or a corporate monopoly owns the compute, the energy, the models, and the currency printing press, your 'abundance' is entirely subject to their permission.

[Numan467]

Your anger is fair, Elon is describing YOUR future, not his. The xAI owner is not afraid of being replaced by AI.
The UBI doubt is also likely to be right, but for the wrong reasons. Problem is that the political drive is lacking, and UBI fails not because of evil billionaires twisting their mustaches in boardrooms, but because of this. 50 percent of population that needs it opposes it. It is not craziness, it is just really hard to understand.
BlackHatCoiner question remains unanswered — who owns the machine? Dodging to name Elon is a way to avoid the issue. 😄

Haha. Good job. I hope you had a laugh using Grok to defend Elon. Have fun trying to rank up this account.

Grok to stand up for Elon – that's actually funny, I'll give you that. 

If my point was made by AI, it did bad job as I never stood up for Elon once. No, he is telling you what is going to happen to YOU, not him. That is not a defense, it is just comment on who will have the power when the machines come.

As far as rank up is involved, I am still in learning phase.

[Filicius]

And there is also the incentive part. Since "work is optional", meaning people will get everything they want whether they work or not, what would be the incentive for people to work? He is basically describing a communist system, which has never worked.

This is a key point I don’t fully understand yet, and although I can think in ways to incentivize people work in certain jobs (you can romanticise a profession enough to convince people to give even their lives for them, like soldiers but also other professions that are very sacrificial, like surgery or nursing). Education and culture play a role there. But for how many people would it be enough with that, if it is not attached to a economic reward, is a total mistery.

[viljy]

What is the incentive for AI and robot owners to produce "universal abundance" for people who do nothing for robot owners? They won't work because robots work, they won't buy, because money will die in a world of abundance... That is, the engine of capitalist production - profit does not exist. Then why should production exist?

In general, Karl Elon Marx Musk just needs the growth of his companies' shares, and in order to whet interest in them, he tells neo-Marxist tales about universal abundance. What looks more realistic is not unconditional income and universal abundance, but a bowl of soup a day for "extra people" who do not have and will never have a job. Not only because robots work, but also because mass production is likely to disappear altogether (the disappearance of effective demand). By the way, there is a collection of essays from various scientists (including Wallerstein) that answer the question "Does Capitalism Have a Future?" And that's also the name of this interesting book... It's better than the fairy tales from Musk.

[nutildah]

Grok to stand up for Elon – that's actually funny, I'll give you that.  

If my point was made by AI, it did bad job as I never stood up for Elon once. No, he is telling you what is going to happen to YOU, not him.

Your point was made by AI and you are a terrible liar. I thought you were joking at first because you got your 3 merits from a recently-disgraced account farmer. But no, it turns out your serious.

I would say I think AI is making people dumber, but that's not entirely true. Its a tool like anything else. When the internet came around, I thought it'd make people smarter, but nope, because it also gives the dumbest people on the planet a chance to congregate and convince themselves they know things.

Still, smart people use the internet to make themselves smarter, and dumb people use it to make themselves dumber. Its the exact same thing with AI. You have chosen to use it to make yourself dumber.

That is not a defense, it is just comment on who will have the power when the machines come.

As far as rank up is involved, I am still in learning phase.

You're still in learning phase but you can slip in and out of perfect English when it suits you.  

Do you even know what "twisting their mustaches in boardrooms" means? Can you honestly answer without having to ask Grok?

[Numan467]

Grok to stand up for Elon – that's actually funny, I'll give you that.  

If my point was made by AI, it did bad job as I never stood up for Elon once. No, he is telling you what is going to happen to YOU, not him.

Your point was made by AI and you are a terrible liar. I thought you were joking at first because you got your 3 merits from a recently-disgraced account farmer. But no, it turns out your serious.

I would say I think AI is making people dumber, but that's not entirely true. Its a tool like anything else. When the internet came around, I thought it'd make people smarter, but nope, because it also gives the dumbest people on the planet a chance to congregate and convince themselves they know things.

Still, smart people use the internet to make themselves smarter, and dumb people use it to make themselves dumber. Its the exact same thing with AI. You have chosen to use it to make yourself dumber.

That is not a defense, it is just comment on who will have the power when the machines come.

As far as rank up is involved, I am still in learning phase.

You're still in learning phase but you can slip in and out of perfect English when it suits you.  

Do you even know what "twisting their mustaches in boardrooms" means? Can you honestly answer without having to ask Grok?

I use sometime translation tool to help correct my grammar because English is not my native language, but the thoughts and opinions are entirely mine. If using translation tools is crime here, then half the forum is guilty.

As for the merits, that user was basically raining merits all over the local board recently, and I happened to get few like many others.

And yes, "mustache-twirling" just refers to standard cartoonish villains planning bad things, it is not rocket science. You can keep calling me dumb or accusing me all day, but I am just here participating and learning like everyone else.

[legiteum]

And there is also the incentive part. Since "work is optional", meaning people will get everything they want whether they work or not, what would be the incentive for people to work? He is basically describing a communist system, which has never worked.

Again, you are making the same mistake about human nature that Musk is making: people can never "get everything they want". Ever.

Today, in most developed countries, you can "live" without working. It's unpleasant, it's uncool, it's uncomfortable, but you won't die right away.

In the future, insofar as AI abundance is distributed to the masses (big IF there), that baseline ("free tier" I call it) will rise. But the effects will be the same: most people will not be satisfied with the baseline, they will want their life to be more interesting, more comfortable, more attractive, etc.

Musk is implying that everybody's going to be rich like he is, which is retarded. Even Musk can understand the logical impossibility of that statement.

Musk is just spouting nonsense and laughing because the media is going to call utter nonsense "genius". Next he will say that we'll be ruled by the Border Collies in 20 years.

[MicroGuy]

Post-AI Abundance is a pipe dream. The AI is going to take over and we'll be bootlicking and eating peanuts if we're lucky.

[BlackHatCoiner]

So, money will still be necessary—and therefore a UBI—if the work done by robots and AI replaces human labor.

But, why would a UBI be necessary? I'm following your thought experiment. Yes, in the hypothetical future that we don't yet have "total abundance", assuming that 100% of human labor is replaced by robots (which is an insane, unnatural and unreasonable assumption, but let's ignore for the sake of discussion), why can't people still trade their goods with money? Why is a UBI needed?

Think about it. The UBI is issued by the government, and is given to the people to spend it on stuff. That means trade is still taking place, it's just ultra-communist. So the question remains; why can't you just complete the trade with just money?

[Alpha Marine]

And there is also the incentive part. Since "work is optional", meaning people will get everything they want whether they work or not, what would be the incentive for people to work? He is basically describing a communist system, which has never worked.

Again, you are making the same mistake about human nature that Musk is making: people can never "get everything they want". Ever.

I'm not agreeing with him. I'm talking based on his POV for discussion's sake. I agree people can never get everything they want. What I mean there is, "by his logic," if work is optional, because people already have all they want and don't need to work, then they won't work because there is no incentive to work.

Musk is implying that everybody's going to be rich like he is, which is retarded. Even Musk can understand the logical impossibility of that statement.

I don't think this is what he is implying. I watched the interview. 
I think it wouldn't be so ridiculous if this is what he is implying. From the interview, he's implying that the concept of "rich" would not be a thing because nobody will have money, or better still, nobody will have the need for money. According to him, when you already get everything you need/want for free, what is the money for?
His points are so absurd that he couldn't even explain how it would work for the interviewer. I'm certain he doesn't even believe the things he said.

[legiteum]

Musk is implying that everybody's going to be rich like he is, which is retarded. Even Musk can understand the logical impossibility of that statement.

I don't think this is what he is implying. I watched the interview. 

I think it wouldn't be so ridiculous if this is what he is implying. From the interview, he's implying that the concept of "rich" would not be a thing because nobody will have money, or better still, nobody will have the need for money. According to him, when you already get everything you need/want for free, what is the money for?

His points are so absurd that he couldn't even explain how it would work for the interviewer. I'm certain he doesn't even believe the things he said.

Sometimes I think that everything he says is just an inside joke--that he's just going to the media and saying absurd things just to watch them call it, "genius". It's a power trip.

The subject, for what it's worth, is an interesting one. People are talking about UBI, which is totally unnecessary and a waste of resources. I think folks like Andrew Yang throw the concept around to get morons to vote for him because it sounds cool (everybody wants some extra money, right?).

If the future has tons of AI abundance, and the political system is such that there is call to distribute it (as opposed to concentrate it into a tiny few for instance, which is what the current laws would do), the surplus will be distributed in the form of enhanced versions of the stuff we already have. In other words, more subsidized health care, better free or low-income housing, better free education, free/subsidized college, free transportation, etc. In other words, just a straightforward expansion of everything our governments already do, with taxes on the profits of all of these systems to pay for it all.

But that's really boring sounding for "revolutionaries" like Andrew Yang, so he talks about UBI because it's completely different. But in reality it's not practical money-wise, and politically it's not going to work either because most people don't want massive upheaval when there's a good evolutionary alternative like the stuff above.

The Soviets tried a "no money" society and ended up creating massive correlation databases between Soviet products and Western ones so they could properly price things, because without pricing they couldn't balance supply and demand. Money, prices, and things that cost money are here to stay no matter how much overall productivity rises.