Survival of the AI ​​revolution in a post-worker economy

While the AI ​​weapon race continues to heat up the major technology companies, and AI is merged in just about every industry that is there, the inevitable panic also starts to start: when AI “replaces” us – whether we are doctors, engineers, lawyers, teachers, financial analysts or writers – only in hell?

Maybe you also like it: AI could destroy crypto within five years Opinion

Take a deep breath. No panic. If you look a little closer, this is the logical expansion of what we have seen in recent decades with so much automation of the information age, if not the industrial era of the last centuries. The original technical paranoiacs were the Luddites, the class of British workers who objected to the increased use of mechanized looms and knitting frames. These were craftsmen who had given their life -made, creative and physical, by a vessel, and they argued that those who are now operating these new machines took away their means of existence. Sounds known?

These protests came to the level of violence, including the destruction of factories where these machines were operated. Whatever catharsis this also given to the Luddites in the short term, it was not a very effective long -term strategy. The mechanized looms and their descendants won on the market of money and ideas.

Present Alternatives Value Both humans and the machine incorrectly

The very human problem of existential crises in light from machine -based integration is not only a story that is as old as time, but one that continues to repeat in an era in which people have started to trust a kind of technology. Amazon had his own version of the Luddites in the early 2000s when it introduced the first robots to automate his warehouse activities, with employees who experience the same fears that the Luddites did.

Who knows, there were probably even protests against the wheel by those who had made their livelihood with items on their backs, it just wasn’t documented. Nobody ever wins by going back, only by finding out how they adapt to the current tide that always improves.

In this most recent phase of AI development it is just the last, and perhaps the final phase of a fully automated information age, effectively an end to that information age and the next new thing, whatever that is. It may seem strange and dangerous now, but the only thing needed is the kind of small -scale and large -scale adjustment that we have always had to make.

As the development of artificial intelligence spreads exponentially, economies compete with the fact that they have worked historically by being very labor-driven and the uncertainty that is created when the burden of work almost completely throws away from people to algorithms in the form of AI agents. Whether it concerns physical labor, manual labor, intellectual work or creative labor, it has always been work that has been served as the locus of income.

Nobody has proposed a workable solution for what this centering of work will follow. A popular alternative that is often presented is universal basic income, which completely destroys work in generating income. However, this has never been practical outside of very small pilots because it insufficiently takes into account hierarchies and priorities driven by the congenital human desire for stimulation.

Enter the Intellecteconomy

When we look at the disruption caused by the technological revolutions from the past, we tend to concentrate on the technology itself, rather than how that technology was used and who uses it. The fears of these technologies are not really about the technologies themselves, but how those with economic power could use these technologies, and the creative labor they mimic to create a greater economic imbalance.

As a way of protection against this result, we propose a different type of UBI: Universal Baseline Intellect. Just as the mechanization of the industrial era took human patterns of physical creation and only repeated them on assembly lines, the same now takes place when it comes to the patterns of ideas -based creation. Intellect is used, so it deserves to be monitored. We must ensure that the correct value is attributed to the input that is placed in these new systems, and not necessarily on the output, not only because it is the right and honest to do, but because it will create the entire buy-in at all levels to support this new economy.

When building a new economy with new priorities, we must ensure that individuals retain the right to the use and income of income of their own intellectual property. Of all available roads available for this, decentralization may have offered the easiest and best means to ensure that ownership belongs to the original owner, with an unparalleled ability to earn money with any type of intellectual ‘assets’ in the digital space. We must give priority to an intellecteconomy where personal AI agents learn from human experience are also owned by that very human, and can create continuous possibilities on a continuous basis.

We still have time to make the new AI economy a transforming shift that works for the many, instead of a dangerous disturbance that enriches the few at the expense of those many. While we switch to a post-agent, post-web world, which shift from attention based on intention-driven systems, we need solutions that ensure that people stay in the center of intelligence. If we can, then the fears of AI will change the hope of free humanity from the chains of useless work and to a better and more enlightened form of creating intellectual value.

Read more: Reconsider money in the Web3 era: from capital to code, story and moral design Opinion