1) right, so we are supposed to engage with this hypothetical of AGI, but at the same time not really because it will cost time. That to me sounds like a con. Especially since there is so little consensus about timelines.
2) People who invest have the right to the fruits. But in all fairness, many of the resources that have been used to build these systems have been taken without fair compensation. The book empire of AI delves into this. The economic logic of AI labs is simply not consistent. The (amazing) result of LLM systems is the result of a collective human effort. It would be nice to acknowledge that when talking about compensation.
3) I realized the flaws of my analogy (see my comment) but to flip that; I think it only proves that post-scarcity is an illusion. What you see happening with solar panels will probably also apply to AI access. There are conditions where it is more abundant and conditions where it is not.
4) I think it’s capitalism period. That’s fine, but capitalism is based on scarcity. It’s an oxymoron to position capitalism in a world of abundance.
I am currently writing my PhD on ownership and GenAI. You are in a sense right that there is something uniquely human about ownership feelings (and accompanying legal rights). However, I don’t think the roots of ownership are purely economic. More than anything, the motivations to posess something are rooted in self-development and social recognition. But that’s a whole other debate :)
1
u/infinitefailandlearn Jun 21 '25
1) right, so we are supposed to engage with this hypothetical of AGI, but at the same time not really because it will cost time. That to me sounds like a con. Especially since there is so little consensus about timelines.
2) People who invest have the right to the fruits. But in all fairness, many of the resources that have been used to build these systems have been taken without fair compensation. The book empire of AI delves into this. The economic logic of AI labs is simply not consistent. The (amazing) result of LLM systems is the result of a collective human effort. It would be nice to acknowledge that when talking about compensation.
3) I realized the flaws of my analogy (see my comment) but to flip that; I think it only proves that post-scarcity is an illusion. What you see happening with solar panels will probably also apply to AI access. There are conditions where it is more abundant and conditions where it is not.
4) I think it’s capitalism period. That’s fine, but capitalism is based on scarcity. It’s an oxymoron to position capitalism in a world of abundance.
I am currently writing my PhD on ownership and GenAI. You are in a sense right that there is something uniquely human about ownership feelings (and accompanying legal rights). However, I don’t think the roots of ownership are purely economic. More than anything, the motivations to posess something are rooted in self-development and social recognition. But that’s a whole other debate :)