zlacker

>>Berisl+(OP)
I’m not a doomer, but I also kind of look at it this way. I was born in 1978 and I no longer live in the same world.

I don’t look at it as doom but just as a period of very rapid change. As the Chinese saying goes, living in interesting times is a blessing and a curse.

I don’t know what happens next, which is both interesting and scary especially when I think about my kids. They could end up living in a collapsing failed state (or worse) or in a post-scarcity technosphere or something I am not imagining.

>>api+l4
Unfortunately a collapsing failed state is a possibility and over a long enough time scale almost a cettainty, while post-scarcity is a utopian pipe dream.

Resources will always be scarce, and honestly I don't know what people would do or how they would be motivated in a world where they can always have anything they want or need.

>>_heimd+f9
Post-scarcity is kind of a bad term. You’ll always have scarcity at some scale. I think as popularly used this refers to a society where the “floor” is at the level of say a US lower middle class person with some level of health coverage. This could be something like a society where tech driven deflation made most necessities dirt cheap, we started building housing again and reduced housing costs, and there is a UBI.

True post-scarcity would mean anyone could have their own private plane, spaceship, etc. That couldn’t happen without some kind of speculative singularity scenario where we get Mr. Fusion and benevolent superintelligent AI or something. Star Trek levels of post-scarcity are sci-fi.