Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you think people are happier now than they were in the 80s/90s/00s? I don’t think so, at least not in the us. Granted I was younger during those times .
Yes, dramatically so. The 1980s and 1990s sucked, we live in the future.
The bridge to wealth is being pulled up with AI
171–180 of 435 posts
Re: The bridge to wealth is being pulled up with AI
#172Earlier quoted context omitted.
What are ai and robots other than excess labor, waiting to be allocated? Why does the wealth have to come from the meat bags?
Who is going to buy the stuff that the AI and robots produce, then? What will the point be of producing all this stuff?
Re: The bridge to wealth is being pulled up with AI
#173Until I see median real income start to actually go down, I just don't buy it. AI is currently a commodity. Maybe one of the labs will be able to differentiate sufficiently to be able to charge the kinds of premiums they need just to pay back their investors. Maybe, instead, we'll see something akin to the FOSS revolution, where large, high-quality, open training sets are developed to make sure there's always a fair…
You can't just look at real median income. You also need to look at other factors like wealth inequality, housing prices and health care.
Re: The bridge to wealth is being pulled up with AI
#174Slopspeak detected.
Re: The bridge to wealth is being pulled up with AI
#175Earlier quoted context omitted.
We’re already there. Your individual labor isn’t enough to make a living unless you subscribe to the altar of a feudal FAANG. This is preposterous. > Collectively, the wealthiest 1% held about $55 trillion in assets in the third quarter of 2025 — roughly equal to the wealth held by the bottom 90% of Americans combined. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-wealth-gap-widest-in-three-d...
> We’re already there. Your individual labor isn’t enough to make a living unless you subscribe to the altar of a feudal FAANG. This is preposterous. You think you already can't "make a living" without working at a FAANG? Is this a serious post?
And it's because only those companies are big enough to cut deals to shield themselves and their subjects from the massive amounts of debt the world economy is being forced to service; everyone else is dumping a double-digit percentage of their labor into covering the bad bets of our banks.
Re: The bridge to wealth is being pulled up with AI
#176Re: The bridge to wealth is being pulled up with AI
#177Earlier quoted context omitted.
What are ai and robots other than excess labor, waiting to be allocated? Why does the wealth have to come from the meat bags?
Who is going to buy the stuff that the AI and robots produce, then? What will the point be of producing all this stuff?
Re: The bridge to wealth is being pulled up with AI
#178This doesn't make much sense. Lots of people with high IQ don't have high income because they were born in the wrong country.
Re: The bridge to wealth is being pulled up with AI
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was flagged for being clearly botted, and I don't just mean LLM-generated (although it is also that). When I posted on and flagged the old submission, I noted that it had over two dozen upvotes in 15 minutes, despite the essay having a helpful "54 min read" indicator at the top. I truly do not believe the upvotes on these submissions are organic, and it really destroys my faith in HN that this was restored when th…
You don't have to read the whole thing to upvote it.
Re: The bridge to wealth is being pulled up with AI
#180My first reaction is that it's a bit of oversimplification, LLMs have been on the scene for what like 4 years now? I doubt the effects will be visible when you look at the data.
But on the topic of inequality as a result of changes how value add is distributed between business owners and the labor - there's a very relevant book by Thomas Pickety called "Capital in the 21st century" (I believe he used the title of a similar work by another economist in 18th century on the same topic). He collected as much data as he could on income and wealth of individuals and groups for Western nations (some going back to like 17th century) and did some analysis.
In a nutshell, the share of profits going towards the business owners (simplifying, inherited capital) in the West had been increasing in the 18th and the 19th century, likely due to Industrial Revolution. Which in the US culminated in extreme inequality personified in Robber Barons (Carnegie, Rockefeller and Co). It was followed by economic and financial collapse, mass unemployment, and arguably, 2 world wars. It also resulted in creating various mechanisms designed to prevent these things in the future, such as anti-trust regulations.
After WWII (especially in the US) the distribution of value add between the ownership/capital and the labor changed so that the labor started getting larger and larger share, to the point that the economists declared that the capitalism solved the issue of inequality. That trend reversed around 1970s/1980s, which coincided with the invention of complex electronic computing and communication devices (and therefore inventions of the new business models). From that point on the share of profits going towards the business owners started increasing again, and that speed has been actually accelerating since the 2000s.
imho at this point US is basically where we were in the end of 19th/early 20th century. The individuals' names are different, the issues (extreme monopolization/concentration of capital) are the same. LLMs and other GenAI stuff are simply part of that trend.
Hopefully people at the power learned something from what happened 100+ years ago. But I kinda sorta doubt it.