Hey Toby, thanks for your comment! I’m not sure we really disagree, because I agree that transfers are an important part of the picture, that’s why I said “all of the interesting work is in designing anti-trust and tax measures that are robust to superintelligence”. But I agree that my comment insufficiently emphasized the redistributive aspect. The overall point is that we may not need to design a brand new set of institutions to deal with the rise of superintelligence. At least one hypothesis worth considering is that markets plus avoiding market failure plus redistributive tax and transfer will be sufficient. We already have lots of political institutions that seek to remedy distributive problems associated with markets, and maybe these institutions will scale with growth in GDP. Or maybe not! But at least, I think this is a great place to start for the analysis, as opposed to from scratch
Hey Toby, thanks for your comment! I’m not sure we really disagree, because I agree that transfers are an important part of the picture, that’s why I said “all of the interesting work is in designing anti-trust and tax measures that are robust to superintelligence”. But I agree that my comment insufficiently emphasized the redistributive aspect. The overall point is that we may not need to design a brand new set of institutions to deal with the rise of superintelligence. At least one hypothesis worth considering is that markets plus avoiding market failure plus redistributive tax and transfer will be sufficient. We already have lots of political institutions that seek to remedy distributive problems associated with markets, and maybe these institutions will scale with growth in GDP. Or maybe not! But at least, I think this is a great place to start for the analysis, as opposed to from scratch
Thanks for the clarification, and apologies for missing that in your original comment.
You’re definitely right that my original comment failed to explain the importance of redistribution!