[ExI] far future
anders at aleph.se
Sat Jan 11 21:59:01 UTC 2014
On 10/01/2014 23:09, BillK wrote:
> If you have spent your life gaining power and riches, this means that
> you have access to resources that the mass of the population don't
> have. Giving cheap energy to everyone else devalues the assets that
> you own and devalues your life spent gaining riches.
This view seems to be pretty popular. Just look at Elysium. Yet it flies
in the face of most economic theory, and empirically you tend to find
rich and powerful people spending more effort on making themselves more
rich and powerful compared to their reference class of other rich people
than non-reference class people.
My own explanation for its popularity is that it improves self-esteem of
non-rich and non-powerful people by making the rich and powerful to be
bad people. Hence it is not so wrong to want to take their resources
from them, one will look better in comparison (especially given our
self-serving biases that make us think we are more moral than the
Historically in modern societies, the people who have gained wealth and
power have typically been the ones that sell something everybody
wants/needs or get a lot of popular support for their policies. While
Slim, Gates and Ortega no doubt defend their wealth, they do not look
like they are wedded to the status quo - in fact, like many modern rich
people they seem happy to invest in new tech. Let's not forget #19 on
Forbes, Jeff Bezos and his space projects, #20 Larry Page #21 Segey Brin
with Calico and loads of robotics, #30 George Soros with the Institute
for New Economical Thinking, #527 Elon Musk with his space projects, and
#931 Peter Thiel - these people hardly strike me as pro-status quo).
> People don't much like being told their life's efforts have been cheapened.
This is an explanation for much life extension resistance.
Future of Humanity Institute
Oxford Martin School
Faculty of Philosophy
More information about the extropy-chat