Interesting thought by @sama on AI-enabled Moore's law of everything: "Imagine a world where, for decades, everything–housing, education, food, clothing, etc.–became half as expensive every two years." 1/11
Labor is expensive, and AI promises to reduce the cost of labor to something nearing zero. The result is lower prices and higher profit margins. 2/11
Thanks to the reduction in labor costs, coupled with net-new value creation, AI will likely be the most significant source of wealth creation in human history. Our research suggests that AI could add $30T to equity market capitalization over the next 15-20 years. 3/11
But not all will benefit from AI-generated wealth. A factory robotics company might generate billions in revenue at an 80% gross margin, but the factory workers it displaces will lose their jobs. 4/11
And factory workers are not the only labor force to be displaced by automation. AI will also disrupt many white-collar professions such as law, medicine, and engineering. 5/11
The potential for further economic inequality creates fear: the working-class fear economic oppression and the wealthy fear a violent uprising. 6/11
The popular solution in Silicon Valley is to further tax companies and redistribute some share of the wealth. Many envision a world in which humans allocate their time to the pursuit of happiness rather than income. The robots work; we humans play. 7/11
Many disagree with this solution for various reasons. 8/11
One issue to consider is that humans need a sense of purpose, and many of us derive a sense of purpose from work. Tribe and War (both by @sebastianjunger) provide an extraordinary glimpse into the human psyche. Do we really want a world without any form of work? 9/11
I don't know what the right answer is, but humans are surprisingly good at adaptation. I'm sure the balance of power, and human determination and creativity, will enable us to navigate the transition successfully. 10/11
The average quality of life in the future will likely be better than in the present or the past.
1900s: Economies of Scale
2000s: Network Effects
2020s: Data Advantages
1/14
Economies of Scale: In the 1900s, the dominant companies benefited from scale. Standard Oil's size enabled Rockefeller to negotiate railroad rebates, acquire early tank cars, etc. He could profitability sell oil at a price point lower than his competitors could produce it. 2/14
Economies of scale aren't as powerful in software because the underlying infrastructure components - internet, servers, etc. - are generally shared resources. The cost of compute isn't that much different for BigCo and SmallCo. And scale is available instantly. 3/14