This is a very short-sighted, and exceedingly common, take.

Until the machines aren't owned by anyone (or owned by everyone, take your pick on the phrasing), the owners of the machine have no need to keep you alive.

This take is basically "Don't worry, people like Sam Altman are looking out for us"...

▲

zkmon an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Disparity in ownership of machines is not the main factor that is driving the need for work. It is the un-ending desire (or selling pressure) to have things that require money to buy. Most people work to be able to pay their loans and have things that are perceived to be common needs in their geography and culture.

These "needs" are sometimes enforced by the systems and government so that people don't stay away from the work and "economy" keeps churning. The housing prices could be a way to keep the people working for loan payments.

Instant foods, nursing homes for elderly, creches, roads, commuter trains - are all ways to have more workers and make them focused on work.

	▲	lelanthran an hour ago \| parent [-]
		You are missing my point; if you have no value other than unthinking manual labour to offer the world, why would the world keep you alive? "Work" doesn't exist to keep people busy, it exists to keep them alive.

▲

strken an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's quite a good metaphor. What used to happen to an old horse? How many horses do you see now that the world has moved to tractors[0]?

I can't wait to be kept in agistment by my overlords, fed on treacle and oats, ridden in circles once a fortnight, and shot when I break a leg.

[0] https://www.researchgate.net/figure/United-States-Farm-based...

	▲	defrost an hour ago \| parent [-]
		> I can't wait to be kept in agistment by my overlords, fed on treacle and oats, ridden in circles once a fortnight, and shot when I break a leg. Luxury horse living during the heyday of working horses and pit ponies, "horse power" wasn't left ideal for a fortnight. > How many horses do you see now that the world Personally, a surprising number perhaps, there's a pony club at the top of my street in town, and the area is still littered with horses and other livestock. This isn't my area, but it's not dissimilar: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45623799 Full size image: https://live-production.wcms.abc-cdn.net.au/a26664f6500a7c74...

▲

lowbloodsugar an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Sure. But either way we aren’t going to have to worry about it. We’ll have post scarcity utopia, or we’ll have died. But there is an argument that the billionaire need to pay attention to: an ASI that kills 7 billion people won’t mind killing a few more.

	▲	jambalaya8 27 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		What happens in the space between when we think we have reached an equilibrium and an eventual incipient utopia, and whenever 9/10ths or whatever of the population is dead? What will AIs think of our fitness, anyway? Are we training them to be non-judgmental (and how is that safer or less safe?) and enforcing some weird idea of "equality"? Or are we teaching AIs to choose our choices for us, and our survivors, down the line? What will people be like when that time comes, anyway?