Dieser Artikel macht einen sehr guten Punkt. Unser gesamtes aktuelles ökonomisches Denken steht im Paradigma der neoklassischen Ökonomie. In seinen zentralen Grundsätzen geht es um den Umgang mit Knappheit. Doch künstliche Intelligenz macht das, was früher knapp war, reichlich vorhanden. Das können wir schon sehen. Open-Source-KI ist mit allem vergleichbar, in das Investoren Hunderte von Milliarden investieren. Sie können sein Fachwissen kostenlos in Anspruch nehmen. Bald wird dieses Fachwissen die Arbeit erledigen, die jeder Anwalt oder Arzt leisten kann. Jeder auf dem Planeten Erde wird das kostenlos haben können.
In diesem Artikel geht es darum, wie die Wirtschaft in dieser Welt neu erfunden werden muss, die Regeln der alten Welt der freien Märkte und der Knappheit zusammenbrechen und einfach nicht mehr funktionieren werden.
Why do we still look at AI through the lens of neoclassical economics? It's designed to make sense of the economics of scarcity, but AI will be abundant.
byu/lughnasadh inFuturology
12 Kommentare
I don’t think it’s near to replace lawyers and doctor and it won’t be free for sure.
First we need to figure out what AI can actually do. LLMs are very bad at medicine so the notion that we won’t need doctors is outright absurd. Are you cancelling your health care insurance because you have access to Grok? Come on.
The question is, will you still have the guns you need to take it from the people who control it?
The fact that open source projects are producing ai at the same level as billion dollar companies seems to point to the fact that ai is not changing the world as much as we may hope.
There is not enough energy in the world to make it „abundent“ yet.
Even if tomorrow we crack the Fusion problem, we still need to build it, build the infrastructure, build the physical compute power…
Take your best guess at how many people were put out of jobs in 2025 and divide 5 billion by that number.
THAT is the scale of the problem. Even in the US, it is orders of magnitude where 250K were possibly replaced, at the cost of 91TW. There are *161 million workers to replace*.
open source models are free but computing power is not free and that is what you pay for.
>Soon, that expertise will do the work any lawyer or doctor can do.
You *must* have shares in OpenAI or there’s *zero chance* you actually believe this.
And even if you do, you surely don’t believe it, but I could at least understand the grift
The future is becoming increasingly unpredictable and looking at AI through the lens of classical economics misses the point. AI will change everything in ways we can’t yet imagine
I don’t know what I find worse: AI fatalists who believe it’s going to be the end of us all, or starry-eyed techbro visions like this.
LLMs are among the most energy intensive digital technologies we’ve ever invented. The only reason they are so readily available right now is because investors are pumping trillions of dollars into the market. Server farms, electricity and GPU chips are not free. Someone is financing them, and someone will expect a hefty return on this investment. „Abundance“ is something only a select few will end up with, and their paycheck depends on the rest of us believing stories just like this.
edit: because it fits, the WSB sub is right now looking at cash burn statistics. Apparently, OpenAI is expected to spend money at ten times the rate of Netflix and Tesla combined. Whatever they’re building, it’s not going to be cheap.
I would love for you to tell me more about how you’re reveling in abundance
AI still takes resources and will be finite thus there is a cost.
Just like how the internet made education redundant because we have all of humanity’s knowledge and expertise at our fingertips, right?