[xster]

That isn't the OP's point I believe. I think the point was if the more productive means of production is ultra-centralized to a few owners of AI, the question wouldn't be whether to go outside, but whether you can afford to not be permanently outside, if the superstructure of society assigns housing to capital and not humans.

[visarga]

> if the more productive means of production is ultra-centralized to a few owners of AI

But AI is different than previous waves, like search engines and social networks. You can download a model on a stick. You can run it on a CPU or GPU, even a phone. These models are easy to work with, directly in natural language, easy to fine-tune, faster, cheaper, and private under your control. AI is a decentralizing technology, will empower everyone directly, it's like open source and Linux in that it puts users in control.

[konschubert]

Since this is just knowledge, I don't think it can be guarded all that well.

[ohthatsnotright]

> Chips are made from sand.

And that sand takes a very, very long time with lots of big brains to figure out how to manipulate at the nanometer level in order to give you a "beep boop"

It's not like Intel could decide tomorrow to spin up a fab and immediately make NVIDIA and TSMC irrelevant. They're the next closest thing given they make chips, have GPU technology, and also foundry experience and it's still multiple years of effort if they chose that direction.

Your statement is a lot like saying "poker has predictable odds" and yet there is still a vast ocean of poker players.

[patientzero]

Anyone can make a cotton gin.. Industrialization of an industry basically centralizes its profits on a relatively small number of winners who have some advantage of lead time on some important factors as it becomes not worthwhile for the vast majority of participants from when it required more of the population.

[itishappy]

If knowledge alone were sufficient, foundational models would be ubiquitous.