←back to thread

339 points throw0101c | 4 comments | | HN request time: 0.63s | source
Show context
niemandhier ◴[] No.44612914[source]
Railroads lead to a distribution of capital into the society and to a long term increase of wealth for many.

Ai leads to a capital concentration on the hands of those that already have money and might lead to a long term reduction of wealth for the middle class.

Less purchasing power in the population usually is not good for economic development, so I have my doubts with respect to a boom .

replies(1): >>44613015 #
1. chii ◴[] No.44613015[source]
> Railroads lead to a distribution of capital into the society

does it? I recall that railroads were monopolies (the vanderbilts). The gov't had to pass an act to break them up, because there were price collusions and farmers were forced to pay a higher price for their transport of foodstuffs.

> Ai leads to a capital concentration on the hands of those that already have money

that is true for a lot of other capital intensive ventures. Why pick ai specifically?

And AI is less monopolistic - at least it's not a natural monopoly. There are competition, and there are alternatives.

replies(2): >>44613088 #>>44613642 #
2. ruined ◴[] No.44613088[source]
railroads are for moving freight, and you don't move freight if you're not selling goods. yes there were trust issues, but fundamentally a railroad requires a surrounding market.

ai does not, and seems to suffer the "resource curse" https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/Mak2kZuTq8Hpnqyzb/the-intell...

3. niemandhier ◴[] No.44613642[source]
Railroads needed steel and construction.

They were giant infrastructure projects build by thousands of humans.

Ai is not.

replies(1): >>44613765 #
4. chii ◴[] No.44613765[source]
how many more people are involved in the entire supply chain of a single chip, compared to construction of rail roads?