Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Avi Upadhyayula's avatar

This was a great read, thanks. The section on scarcity is something I've been thinking about a lot as well.

For the longest time, talent and outcomes were roughly linear: you put in a certain amount of work in your CS degree, and even if you're not the best engineer, you still get a job in Big Tech and enjoy a middle-class life. But in a world with autonomous systems (ChatGPT, robots doing surgery, whatever), the relationship becomes more of a step function. Either you're below the threshold (e.g. you're worse than GPT), and you can't add value through your "white-collar" labor -- so the value you can add lies in the things GPT can't do (e.g. the trades, like building HVAC or plumbing). Or you're above the threshold (e.g. you're a Google L10 who can spot GPT's mistakes), and you add value by using these systems to solve thousands of tasks at once. (I'm using CS and GPT as an example, but I think the same relationship applies everywhere.)

And when outcomes are polarized (either you're plumbing, or you're a mentat creating billions in value), wealth and status will follow.

Expand full comment
Amir's avatar

This was a great read- I am a realist by nature, for my day job, I constantly look for things that can go wrong and put lives at risk. I have had similar conversations on this topic of ‘we’ and the vibe that I get that people included ‘we’ is shrinking at an accelerated pace. By no mean condoning what ‘Jokers’ do, but looking back at history, when there is no clear pathway/ meaningful chance for the median population for improving or not declining socio-economy, and dominance of a small class, Jokers start showing up. Spoke with family members in LA county, one was ‘so and so lost their house and everything and no one is/ can help them’, another one ‘there is going to be great opportunities to pick up land at real discount’.

Expand full comment
9 more comments...

No posts