Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Fellow_Cardboard t1_j8eyk2t wrote

I think it will be a rather fast polarization between thinking and unthinking people.

Those who don't like intellectual labour may get further simplified, since they can ask simple questions and get simple answers, and don't have to go through the process between A and B.
Intellectuals may find it to be another tool to aid in their strive to become more merited.

Unless literal armageddon arrives before that, i think that within 30 years we will see a society where you pretty much have to be a top dog genius to not live by the scrapes that the absolute majority of people will have to live by, and the absolute chasm between haves and have-nots will be unrivaled.

3

fctu t1_j8f52yx wrote

At that point, why wouldn’t people vote to tax the rich and share the wealth?

1

EulersApprentice t1_j8h7gg4 wrote

See, the problem is the top echelons of society have their wealth in an indestructible unobtainium vault. Not even governments are powerful enough to break into that vault – there are too many layers of defenses keeping intruders out.

People can vote to tax the rich, but the government is simply physically unable to carry out the taxation.

3

often_says_nice t1_j8h6244 wrote

When I think of a chasm between the haves and have nots, I think of medieval times where a king feasts every night while the peasants starve on spoiled bread and die of the plague.

It’s hard to imagine what that would look like in the 21st century. I think as long as the masses have their VR content generators and McDonald’s they’ll be content. Hell, maybe AGI will even design a cheaper more efficient way for humans to get calories.

There may be a larger chasm of haves and have nots, but I think the have nots will still have higher qualities of lives than any previous generation of humans.

1