Why Silicon Valley’s Vision of the AI Future Should Worry You

Three tech leaders, three different pictures of humanity’s ultimate destiny—resignation, survivalism, apocalypticism. But I would assert that they share the same consequences. For one, in each version, the future isn’t something we build together. It’s something they get to build on our behalf. 

And notice who is left out of each version. Altman’s future has room for “great companies” and “expanding human capability,” but arguably less concern for the people whose jobs AI might make irrelevant in the process. Musk’s future may have some room for wealthy people who can book a seat on a colony ship but less for the rest of us. Thiel’s future has room for innovation, but little for those who want to question what we are innovating for and towards. In every case, the very people who have a stake in the future are not part of building that vision of that future.

This also helps explain why some tech bros seem so disinterested in philanthropy or profit-sharing. If you genuinely believe the human era is ending and something else is taking its place, it stands to reason you have no need to feel obligated to the people around you. Why invest in public health, or housing, or building a robust civil society, if the relevant future doesn’t include most of the people who’d benefit? Why fund a school, or fix a subway, or pay taxes toward anything you won’t personally need in twenty years? This eschatology doesn’t just fail to produce ethics. It actively excuses their absence. Empathy stops looking like a virtue and starts looking like a waste of resources on people who, in this version of the future, don’t really count.