Posts
Wiki Contributions
Your understanding of global assets seems quite wrong. These are 2024 numbers so slightly out of date. Fir example public companies total around 111 trillion now. The sp500 is around 52 trillion fwiw.
'Global real estate, encompassing residential, commercial and agricultural lands, cemented its status as the world's largest repository of wealth in 2022 when the market reached a value of $379.7 trillion.
According to a report from international real estate adviser Savills, this value is more than global equities ($98.9 trillion) and debt securities ($129.8 trillion) combined and nearly four times the global gross domestic product ($100.6 trillion)."
Total money is around the same as debt. Private companies add up to a lot but I'm not sure anyone has a good estimate.
I'm not going to get into all the implications. But your premises are not true.
Done.
1Nothing is obviously wrong with it. I'm not sure what probability to assign it. Its sort of "out of sample". But it seems very plausible to me we are in a simulation. It is really hard to justify probabilities or even settle on them. But when I look inside myself the numbers that come to mind are 25-30%.
This is also obvious but Quantum Wave Function Collapse SURE DOES look like this universe is only being simulated at a certain fidelity.
Nothing is obviously wrong with it. I'm not sure what probability to assign it. Its sort of "out of sample". But it seems very plausible to me we are in a simulation. It is really hard to justify probabilities or even settle on them. But when I look inside myself the numbers that come to mind are 25-30%.
7% of income tax returns in the USA include rental income. Most of that 7% can't live off just the rents. But I would say more than 1% of the USA can easily live off of land rents.
I have spent weeks where pretty much all I did was:
-- have sex with my partner, hours per day
-- watch anime with my partner
-- eat food and ambiently hang with my partner
No work. Not much seeing other people. Of course given the amount of sex mundane situations were quite sexually charged. I'm not actually sure if it gets old on any human timeline. You also improve at having fun together. However this was not very good for our practical. But post singularity I probably wont need to worry about practical goals.
In general I think you underestimate the sustainable fun available to at least some humans under minimal conditions. I also found my two months meditating in a tent quite fun. Many people report this never gets old on human timelines either. Until your heath is so terrible you cannot even meditate well it remains fun, or improves!
I do not think you need supermeth to enjoy hedonism. Current human bodies work fine as long as they are in good shape and you have the right disposition. The issue is that if you delve deep into hedonism you will lose out on other things you could have obtained.
Lots of people already form romantic and sexual attachments to AI, despite the fact that most large models try to limit this behavior. The technology is already pretty good. Nevermind if your AI GF/BF could have a body and actually fuck you. I already "enjoy" the current tech.
I will say I was literally going to post "Why would I play status games when I can fuck my AI GF" before I read the content of the post, as opposed to just the title. I think this is what most people want to do. Not that this is going to sound better than "status games" to a lot of rationalists.
It feels to me like the hairs of the nobility are doing amazingly well. That is more than enough money to support a lifestyle of leisure. Such a lifestyle is not available to the vast majority of people. So it seems like they mostly did secure a superior existence for their heirs.
The heirs of European nobility are still very rich on average. So I feel like the main example goes the other way.
We are clearly looking at things differently. That's fine. But if two people see things differently I don't think it's wise to map what they are saying into your ontology.