Will capital-havers or capability-havers gain the most from AI?
Imagine, if you will, a world in which pretty much anybody can own a magic lamp, complete with magic genie, for an operating cost on the order of $100/year. The genie isn't all-powerful, but it's perfectly obedient, perfectly benevolent, and very smart. So smart that it can answer any question as approximately well as it's ever been answered.
To whom go the gains in this scenario? People with a lot of money ("capital-havers") or people who ask the best questions ("capability-havers")?
Okay, obviously I'm talking about AI here. Further, let's limit this discussion for the moment to near-term transformative AI that doesn't enslave us or kill us all, because otherwise who cares about the future of employment.
Anyways, this cutesy metaphor about magic genies is my response to a certain kind of person online who is utterly convinced that they need to get rich quick as soon as possible because once the post-AI world comes to be, there will be no use for human labor, and the only remaining thing of value will be capital.
For one, not all capital is created equal – dollars aren't the same thing as pounds of steel, acres of land, or grams of lithium.
