[ESMirro]

You speak of competition, but the logical end goal here is a handful of companies in control of something that automates large quantities of the current knowledge economy in a way never yet before seen, in a capitalist society already struggling to deal with vast wealth disparity; handing unprecedented power to a handful of people who have already proven they have no regard for the common person.

I don’t agree that there is a historical precedent for the kind of situation this could put the world.

It may all be moot as I doubt the technology will advance to the level we are discussing, but in that scenario I would like you to be correct, but strongly doubt it. We shall see I guess.

[hackerlight]

> You speak of competition, but the logical end goal here is a handful of companies in control of something that automates large quantities of the current knowledge economy in a way never yet before seen, in a capitalist society already struggling to deal with vast wealth disparity; handing unprecedented power to a handful of people who have already proven they have no regard for the common person.

Right, but the outcomes aren't zero-sum. Two things have been simultaneously true in the past. Power accumulating in the hands of capital and wealth disparity increasing (true), and material conditions for the bottom improving (true). This is because there are mechanisms (both naturally within capitalism, as well as via government) that make it impossible for capital to capture all of the upside, even if they are able to capture most of it.

While I agree there is no theory or historical precedent that can predict what the world will look like when AGI arrives -- it's such a paradigm breaking event, and there are many ways we could end up in a dystopia -- I don't see a better alternative approach when it comes to forming a tentative view (specifically pertaining to material conditions).