The Capitalist Paradox
Thinking about he automation age lately. I could see a change in the job market - a fundamental breakdown of the core cycle of capitalism.
What happens when we plug a 'fully automated' future in a our current economic ruleset? In our current system, if we don't work, we don't earn, and we can't buy. Moreover, if an automated system, that perhaps includes Robots+AI, is already doing all the work... well the math doesn't work.
Consumer Ghost Town
It seems there is a shift from B2C to B2B, especially in tech. Corporations are brazenly raising their middle finger to the consumer. Right now companies like Nvidia are making billions selling infrastructure to other tech giants, and leaving their 'consumer' market (mostly gamers in this case) in the wind. Same goes with all them computer RAM manufacturers. This is creating a terminal economic loop if carried to its extreme.
- Company A buys AI servers to replace 90% of its human workforce and cut costs.
- Company B does the very same.
- Both companies are now highly efficient, but thousands of former employees now have zero income.
- Both companies try to sell products.. but who is buying? The consumers have no money, and corporations don't need to buy consumer goods from each other.
Henry Ford famously understood this a century ago when he paid his workers enough to actually afford the cars they were building. If you completely remove the consumer from the equation, the corporate revenue loop collapses.
Human replacement
Of course, as examples: assembly lines, car manufacturing, storage and shipping warehouses have some form of human component. Slowly (but accelerating), humans are being replaced by robots and AI. So there go some blue collar jobs. And yes, tech... programming, design, arts, sound/music, there go some white collar jobs. AI is getting better and better.
I personally think AI is a great tool to automate very boring, tedious jobs, but should not be used to replace human creativity. I appreciate the art / music that comes out of AI from a technical perspective, but it's always a dichotomic feeling. I appreciate it, because it's technically impressive, but there is no humanity, no soul. It's a cleverly manifested combination of everything humans have already created. The individual elements can all be very human. But as a whole I feel the soul gets lost.
However, the humanity IMHO comes from the care, inspiration, soul, respect, appreciation, hate, passion, love, jealousy, disgust, euphoria, behind creation. Does AI then have a soul? Another rabbit hole.
On a deeper level, I might say that classical computer based AI cannot create anything new (e.g. truly cannot create random numbers). But what is considered 'new'? If 'new' is restricted to something that has had no contextual genesis, and has not a dependent influence, can then a human create something from nothing?
AI cannot experience the world. It doesn't know the physical weight of a paintbrush, the grief of loss, or the shock of suddenly being able to see, or hear. It lacks a subjective, biological experience, its "novelty" is mathematical rather than existential.
Humans create something "new" by filtering reality through a chaotic, messy, emotional lens of a biological life. AI creates something "new" by finding unexpected mathematical pathways through the sum total of human knowledge.
Both are forms of creation I suppose. But is it ever truly new?
Post Scarcity vs. Neo-Feudalism
Post Scarcity Utopia (think Star Trek)
If say quantum computing, advanced AI, and humanoid robotics mature to the point where the cost of labour drops to near zero, the cost of producing goods also drops to near zero.
- The shift: Energy (maybe fusion and/or massive solar grids), food production, clothing and housing become incredibly cheap to create.
- The result: Human labour is no longer the resource the drives value. The concept of 'earning a living' becomes obsolete. Money as we know it loses its purpose. Society shifts to a resource-allocation model where the primary goals are perhaps R&D, philosophy, space exploration, cultural expression.
The Neo-Feudalist Dystopia (Phase of Transition)
The terrifying part is not the final destination, it's the transition. Before we ever reach a post-scarcity utopia, we have to cross the bridge where the old rules still apply, but the new tech is active.
- The shift: Corporations own the automated infrastructure (the land, the vertical farming, the server farms, the fleets of robots).
- The threat: If only a handful of individuals or corporations own all the means of production, the rest of humanity becomes economically irrelevant. They don't even need us as consumers become the control the resources directly. This is where concepts like Universal Basic Income or "sovereign wealth dividends" shift from being progressive political ideas to strict mathematical necessities just to keep society from rotting.
What happens to the "Human Element"?
Initially I thought R&D, maintenance for data centres, science lab farming etc.. Even those however, would face automation pressures. A quantum-backed AI could theoretically design its own hardware upgrades, and a Boston Dynamics-esque android could swap out a faulty server blade or just fix a broken tractor in a field.
Even is an AI can write a flawless symphony or paint a perfect digital canvas, humans naturally crave human connection, shared struggles, and authentic expression. We see this already: despite mass-produced factory goods, people pay a premium for handcrafted, artisanal, and 'live' experiences.
If we manage the 'transition' without collapsing into extreme inequality, the future might look less like complete unemployment, and perhaps more like complete freedom. The definition of work changes from something someone must do to survive to something someone chooses to do to contribute or self express.
It really is a dizzying concept, as it requires considering a rewrite of thousands of years of human history based on scarcity. We are hardwired to believe that survival requires greuling effort.
Are we capable of voluntarily shifting toward a post-scarcity mindset, or will our political and economic systems fight to keep the old rules alive as long as possible?