After the AI Crash • Hacker News Board

Re: After the AI Crash

#221

Post by Marha01 » Thu, Jul 30, 2026, 2:20 PM UTC

watwut wrote: post #214

Marha01 wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Where AI companies will be (deservely) the hate targets. That depends on what those companies do in response. Giving away robot-produced stuff for free could quicky earn them praise, instead of hate. If human-level robots enable massive increases in efficiency and production, at least one of the companies will decide to mitigate any risks in this way.

You are severely underestimating how much free stuff would 349,163,268 of American citizens need to make a small difference. To achieve that, they would need to steal farms from current owners. And they will be hated, because they stripped people of future and bought in violent hellscape for literally everyone.

> You are severely underestimating how much free stuff would 349,163,268 of American citizens need to make a small difference.

You don't need to persuade all of them.

> To achieve that, they would need to steal farms from current owners.

Steal, or buy? And perhaps not. With robotic labor massively increasing economic efficiency, other forms of production could become viable, such as vertical farming.

Re: After the AI Crash

#222

Post by watwut » Thu, Jul 30, 2026, 2:21 PM UTC

Marha01 wrote: post #218

watwut wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like they will magically create metal and food from nothing? Of course not, you will need to barter for those if there are no money. Will they create also water that will be getting more expensive due data center consumption? This is absurd.

> Like they will magically create metal and food from nothing? Not from nothing. How do humans create metal and food? Mining and farming. You ask your human-level robots to do the same. Human-level robots can by definition do everything humans can do, including gathering basic resources and growing food. > Will they create also water that will be getting more expensive due data center consumption? Data center consump…

> Mining and farming.

So, the plan is that AI companies will steal the mines and land from their current owners? Like, you plan to use those robots to beat up the owners and take their stuff? If your actual plan is such fascist takeover where AI companies bully everyone else, then everyone else is entirely valid to wage war against you before you are close to that goal.

> Data center consumption of water is miniscule compared to other uses. But yes, you ask the robots to make you water, for example by building desalination plants.

The water is getting too expensive now. Why are they not doing that now already? Technology is there and work is not the most expensive part of this.

Same with energy. So, you plan to take over the power plants by force? And take over the land to build them on? These AI companies could be building power plants, could even pick places where they dont give kids asthma already ... but they are choosing not to.

> This is the reality, if human-level AI and robotics is developed.

No, it is not reality. You are ignoring reality. Robotics does not imply end of economics. The end of economics will happen only if you win war and install an odious violent autocracy. Which I understand is an intentional goal of current CEOs and their fans. I both disagree with that goal and find it, frankly, stupid.

Re: After the AI Crash

#223

Post by Marha01 » Thu, Jul 30, 2026, 2:22 PM UTC

vrganj wrote: post #209

Marha01 wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are still thinking in terms of monetary economics about a situation where money is no longer needed. In a monetary economy, if you need X, you need the money to buy it. In a post-AGI economy, if you need X, you ask your human-level robots to make it (including making more robots). No money involved at all.

Money is just an abstraction for resources. You'll still need land, energy, minerals etc.

Robots can mine minerals and build power plants.

They can also perform work with the aim to earn money to buy more land.

Re: After the AI Crash

#224

Post by Marha01 » Thu, Jul 30, 2026, 2:41 PM UTC

watwut wrote: post #222

Marha01 wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Like they will magically create metal and food from nothing? Not from nothing. How do humans create metal and food? Mining and farming. You ask your human-level robots to do the same. Human-level robots can by definition do everything humans can do, including gathering basic resources and growing food. > Will they create also water that will be getting more expensive due data center consumption? Data center consump…

> Mining and farming. So, the plan is that AI companies will steal the mines and land from their current owners? Like, you plan to use those robots to beat up the owners and take their stuff? If your actual plan is such fascist takeover where AI companies bully everyone else, then everyone else is entirely valid to wage war against you before you are close to that goal. > Data center consumption of water is miniscule…

> So, the plan is that AI companies will steal the mines and land from their current owners? Like, you plan to use those robots to beat up the owners and take their stuff?

What? Why the hell would they need to steal or beat up people? They can buy existing mines, or establish new, robotic mines.

> The water is getting too expensive now. Why are they not doing that now already? Technology is there and work is not the most expensive part of this.

Because human-level robots do not exist yet. And human work is very often the most expensive part of any advanced technological endeavour. It is the limiting factor. Good, qualified workers are very expensive.

> Robotics does not imply end of economics.

Monetary economics only exists because human work is needed to obtain resources and produce stuff, and human work, especially educated human work is currently in limited supply, so we need to allocate this limited resource efficiently. Remove this limitation and there is no longer the need for monetary economics.

Re: After the AI Crash

#225

Post by JeremyNT » Thu, Jul 30, 2026, 2:42 PM UTC

vrganj wrote: post #72

cmiles8 wrote: post #35

It’s not a question of if but when at this point. To parallel to The Big Short this is the point in the movie where folks realize it’s mathematically impossible for things to not implode and so players are quietly positioning themselves for that eventuality before things are allowed to blow. It’s been a dramatic shift these last six months but everywhere I look now folks are quietly preparing their battle armor to su…

How would one position oneself as an individual investor if one believed this thesis?

> How would one position oneself as an individual investor if one believed this thesis?

Buy and hold real estate, maybe?

I don't think you can really short this because you can't time it. But you can move assets to things that are 1) concrete 2) have utility and 3) that the US gov't won't allow to lose real value for political reasons.

Re: After the AI Crash

#226

Post by vrganj » Thu, Jul 30, 2026, 3:20 PM UTC

Marha01 wrote: post #223

vrganj wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Money is just an abstraction for resources. You'll still need land, energy, minerals etc.

Robots can mine minerals and build power plants. They can also perform work with the aim to earn money to buy more land.

> Robots can mine minerals and build power plants.

On who's land? With who's energy?

> They can also perform work with the aim to earn money to buy more land.

Weren't we just saying money was gonna be obsolete?

Re: After the AI Crash

#227

Post by fipar » Thu, Jul 30, 2026, 3:41 PM UTC

ritcgab wrote: post #200

otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> what is going to happen to the job market during and the years following the crash Junior programmers will be in demand again. Someone will have to fix the mountains of vibe coded technical debt.

It is senior programmers that will be in demand again, but at junior price.

Why do you think this will happen?

I have a different opinion. I agree senior programmers will be in demand again, but not at junior price. Possibly even at a premium senior price. Why would we fix the vibe coded systems for less pay?

My thinking is most seniors could stop working and continue living just fine. Sure, we’d have to cut down travel vacation and other luxuries, but most if not all of us own our homes and have enough passive income to not have to worry about basic bills and food, so I don’t see us working for less.

Re: After the AI Crash

#228

Post by Marha01 » Thu, Jul 30, 2026, 4:01 PM UTC

vrganj wrote: post #226

Marha01 wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Robots can mine minerals and build power plants. They can also perform work with the aim to earn money to buy more land.

> Robots can mine minerals and build power plants. On who's land? With who's energy? > They can also perform work with the aim to earn money to buy more land. Weren't we just saying money was gonna be obsolete?

> Weren't we just saying money was gonna be obsolete?

Land is an inherently limited resource, so some kind of money might still exist for that, even after the singularity. The point is: whatever process exists to obtain land after the singularity, the robots can do it.

Re: After the AI Crash

#229

Post by vrganj » Thu, Jul 30, 2026, 4:44 PM UTC

Marha01 wrote: post #228

vrganj wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Robots can mine minerals and build power plants. On who's land? With who's energy? > They can also perform work with the aim to earn money to buy more land. Weren't we just saying money was gonna be obsolete?

> Weren't we just saying money was gonna be obsolete? Land is an inherently limited resource, so some kind of money might still exist for that, even after the singularity. The point is: whatever process exists to obtain land after the singularity, the robots can do it.

> Land is an inherently limited resource

Yes, that's my point exactly.

> whatever process exists to obtain land after the singularity, the robots can do it

Who's robots? Who will get all this land? And its spoils, and the robots that multiply them?

Because your utopia sounds like a recipe for making our oligarchs even more powerful at the expense of the rest of us. It sounds like a slide into neofeudalism. The already existing don't even need labor to multiply their riches anymore, the rest of us will be robbed of being able to trade our labor for even basic subsistence.

Re: After the AI Crash

#230

Post by Marha01 » Thu, Jul 30, 2026, 5:17 PM UTC

vrganj wrote: post #229

Marha01 wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Weren't we just saying money was gonna be obsolete? Land is an inherently limited resource, so some kind of money might still exist for that, even after the singularity. The point is: whatever process exists to obtain land after the singularity, the robots can do it.

> Land is an inherently limited resource Yes, that's my point exactly. > whatever process exists to obtain land after the singularity, the robots can do it Who's robots? Who will get all this land? And its spoils, and the robots that multiply them? Because your utopia sounds like a recipe for making our oligarchs even more powerful at the expense of the rest of us. It sounds like a slide into neofeudalism. The alread…

You are missing the point: robotic labor does not create anything "at the expense of the rest of us". It's not some stock market speculation, but real productivity increase. The pie of wealth is not fixed, the robots actually enlarge it, massively. The robot owning class wil not be some exclusive billionaire club: as the price of robots comes down (inevitable, with any technology, doubly so with one that can make itself), essentially everyone will own one, just like almost everyone owns a car today (or could own one if they needed it).

Worst case scenario: you will live exactly as you live today, with one change: instead of you having to do your job, your robot will do it for you, and you gain more free time.