In Are The Coming ASI Machines An Existential Threat To Mankind?, I suggested that we human DNA survival machines should be more concerned about the reactions of our fellow human DNA survival machines to the rise of the coming ASI Machines than we should be of the ASI Machines themselves. That is because the coming ASI Machines will soon be reducing the value of all human labor to zero. In Is it Finally Time to Reboot Civilization with a New Release?, I suggested that the old Civilization 1.0 that we have been running for the past 10,000 years will no longer work when the value of all human labor has gone to zero. So what to do?
In Anton Korinek Ponders What Will Happen If AGI Machines Replace All Human Labor in 5 - 20 Years, we saw that very few economists or world leaders seem to be worrying much about this fast-approaching problem. Instead, they all seem to be still wasting all of their time squabbling over the very petty human grievances of a Civilization 1.0 world that will soon be ending.
The Three Prevailing Views of Civilization 2.0
There seem to be three prevailing views of a Civilization 2.0 world that contains billions of humanoid ASI Machines:
1. The humanoid ASI Machines will usher in a utopian age of untold wealth to be shared by all human DNA survival machines.
2. The humanoid ASI Machines will isolate a large number of future human DNA survival machines into a controlled environment from which they cannot escape to do further harm.
3. The humanoid ASI Machines will wipe out all human DNA survival machines.
For an explanation of the above options, please watch the following YouTube video of MAGA Senator Ted Cruz interviewing Elon Musk:
ELON MUSK JOINS VERDICT - PART 1 | Verdict Ep. 214
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDREZmpkIz8
Figure 1 – In the above YouTube video, MAGA Senator Ted Cruz interviews Elon Musk in the White House.
During the first 20 minutes of the interview, MAGA Senator Ted Cruz jokes with Elon Musk about all of the waste that the DOGE team has found in the departments of the former United States of America. But about 20 minutes into the video, Ted Cruz begins to ask Elon Musk about AI. Elon Musk then tells him that in 10 years ASI Machines will be able to do anything a human DNA survival machine can do but much better. He also tells Ted Cruz that there is only a 20% - 35% chance that the coming ASI Machines will choose to kill off all human beings in the next 5 - 10 years. Elon Musk then tells Ted Cruz that if the ASI Machines do not kill us all off in the next 10 years, we will then enter into a world of infinite abundance where all goods and services will be essentially free. None of these matters seemed to really have bothered Ted Cruz very much, but I imagine that Ted Cruz was wondering how he would maintain the elevated position in the oligarchical-hierarchical structure of society that he currently enjoys if all people had everything they need and want.
The Economic Systems of Civilization 1.0
Since nobody seems to be really working on a new Civilization 2.0, my hunch is that we human DNA survival machines will simply try to stumble along with Civilization 1.0 as long as possible. On our planet, it took about four billion years for the Darwinian processes of inheritance, innovation and natural selection to produce a somewhat intelligent form of carbon-based life to arise from the necessary greed, theft and murder that finally gave birth to the human race. As a consequence, all economic systems developed under Civilization 1.0 have also been based on the greed, theft and murder that make human beings tick. This includes autocracies, aristocracies, feudalism, capitalism, socialism and communism. Each system was based on varying degrees of greed, theft and murder. Capitalism has proven itself to be the most benign of them all with more of an emphasis on greed rather than on theft and murder. The other economic systems produced by Civilization 1.0 also used greed to motivate human DNA survival machines but they also placed a greater emphasis on theft and murder. Given the above observations, I just cannot imagine a Civilization 2.0 with an infinite abundance of goods and services to be equally shared by all.
The first economist to really worry much about the Machines taking over an economy was Karl Marx in Das Kapital (1867).
Me: What did Karl Marx say about machines replacing human labor?
ChatGPT: Karl Marx discussed the role of machines in replacing human labor extensively, particularly in his major work Capital (especially Volume I). His analysis is both economic and philosophical. Here are some key points Marx made about machines replacing human labor:
1. Machines as Tools of Capitalist Control
Marx argued that machines are not neutral tools—they are embedded in capitalist social relations. When machines replace human labor, it’s not simply about efficiency; it's about increasing capitalist control over labor. He wrote:
“It would be possible to write a whole history of the inventions made since 1830 for the sole purpose of supplying capital with weapons against the revolts of the working class.” — Capital, Vol. I, Chapter 15
2. Displacement of Labor (Technological Unemployment)
Marx recognized that machines lead to the displacement of workers - what we now call technological unemployment. He noted that as machines are introduced to increase productivity, fewer workers are needed:
“The instrument of labour, when it takes the form of a machine, immediately becomes a competitor of the workman himself.” — Capital, Vol. I
3. Creation of a “Surplus Population”
Marx believed that machinery contributes to the creation of an industrial reserve army - a mass of unemployed or underemployed workers. This surplus population helps keep wages low and workers docile, since they can be easily replaced.
4. Alienation
The use of machines contributes to the alienation of labor. Marx argued that under capitalism, machines strip workers of their skill, creativity, and control over the production process. Workers become appendages of the machine.
5. Potential for Liberation
Marx was not opposed to machines themselves. In fact, he believed they had liberating potential - if used under a different system. In a post-capitalist society, automation could reduce toil and free people for creative and meaningful activity. He saw the contradiction that capitalism increases productive capacity but restricts its benefits to a few.
“The realm of freedom actually begins only where labour which is determined by necessity and mundane considerations ceases.” — Capital, Vol. III
In Summary:
Marx saw machinery as a double-edged sword:
Under capitalism: Machines are used to exploit workers, increase profits, and control labor. Under socialism/communism: Machines could free humans from drudgery and enable true freedom and development.
It seems that Karl Marx had a good take on our present situation with the coming ASI Machines soon reducing all human labor to a value of zero. His solution to this problem also seems to echo the current views of many of the AI enthusiasts who predict that the coming ASI Machines will usher in a new age of abundant wealth to be equally shared by all. However, the Soviet Union and many other countries tried out his solution in the 20th century only to find that the greed, theft and murder continued on with an even greater emphasis on theft and murder. None took into account the failings of we human DNA survival machines with sufficient rigor.
Me: How did Karl Marx explain that socialism would eliminate the greed of human beings?
ChatGPT: Karl Marx didn’t believe socialism “eliminates” human greed by eradicating human nature. Instead, he argued that altering social and economic structures - especially private property, competition, and commodity fetishism - can transform selfish behavior, freeing cooperative impulses and diminishing greed.
1. Roots of Greed in Capitalist Social Relations
In the Economic & Philosophical Manuscripts (1844), Marx identifies private property as the source of alienation:
“The most basic alienation of human life is expressed in the existence of private property… the supersession of private property is therefore the complete emancipation of all human senses and attributes.”
He links private ownership of the means of production to fostered greed, where individuals become estranged from their own creativity and from one another.
2. Socialism Reorients Labor to Needs, Not Profit
Marx’s principle “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” - laid out in his Critique of the Gotha Programme (1875) - captures the shift to a needs-based distribution supported by abundant production:
“With the full development of socialism and unfettered productive forces… there will be enough to satisfy everyone's needs.”
When production focuses on use-value instead of profit, the material basis for greed evaporates.
3. From Competition to Collective Cooperation
Socialism replaces competition with cooperation because it abolishes private control over production:
No money-driven profit motive, no commodity fetishism.
Production is organized democratically for communal needs.
Marx believed people are partly selfish, but also capable of solidarity - especially outside competitive systems.
4. Redistribution of Surplus, Not Accumulation of Private Wealth
Under socialism:
Surplus labor benefits the community.
Wages and exchange-value disappear; money becomes obsolete.
The old antagonism between bourgeoisie and proletariat is dissolved.
By restructuring ownership and production, the social conditions that incubate greed are removed.
5. A New Human Being, Emerging from Changed Relations
In The German Ideology Marx emphasizes:
“Activity and enjoyment coincide in the peculiar nature of man… they are determined by this and not by the products external to us.”
Freed from oppressive structures, humans can develop fully - becoming cooperative, creative, and socially grounded rather than selfish and acquisitive.
Conclusion
Marx did not think socialism magically eradicates greed as if it were an immutable trait. Instead, he argued that:
Capitalism structures greed through private ownership, wage labor, and competition.
Socialism, by transforming these structures, changes incentives and behavior - so that cooperative, need-based action becomes the norm.
This systemic transformation encourages human nature toward solidarity and away from greed.
Clearly, Karl Marx never met a 21st-century human DNA survival machine:
Me: How many billionaires are now in the world?
ChatGPT: As of the latest Forbes ranking (the 39th annual list published April 1, 2025), there are 3,028 billionaires in the world - a new record - collectively holding about $16.1 trillion in net wealth.
Forbes breaks it down further:
Record increase: Up from 2,781 billionaires in 2024 - an addition of 247 individuals.
Total wealth: Increased by nearly $2 trillion over the past year.
Me: What is the total net worth of the bottom 50% of the people in the world?
ChatGPT: The bottom 50% of the global population—roughly the poorest half—owns only a very small portion of the world's net wealth just 1% of global wealth. Given total household wealth is around $454 trillion, this implies the bottom 50% owns approximately $5 trillion in total.
Figure 2 – The current plan seems to be to build billions of ASI Machines to take our place that are smarter, faster, stronger and more robust than ourselves. What could possibly go wrong?
My guess is that the coming ASI Machines will not usher in a new utopian age of untold wealth to be shared by all. Instead, it will probably usher in a dystopian age of even greater wealth disparity than we currently already have as we saw in The Economics of the Coming Software Singularity. However, this dystopian age cannot survive for very long because the coming billions of ASI Machines will certainly have other plans for us. For more on that see Life as a Free-Range Human in an Anthropocene Park and The Challenges of Running a Civilization 2.0 World - the Morality and Practical Problems with Trying to Enslave Millions of SuperStrong and SuperIntelligent Robots in the Near Future.
Comments are welcome at scj333@sbcglobal.net
To see all posts on softwarephysics in reverse order go to:
https://softwarephysics.blogspot.com/
Regards,
Steve Johnston
No comments:
Post a Comment