Can someone please elaborate on why physical property might be financial valuable post AGI? I am confused why anything physical could still hold value when full dive VR is possible?
Wouldn't investing 500k in NVIDIA be more financially lucrative than say buying a 500k house?
FWIW I think it probably would be, between those two. Land and houses are different, even if we usually buy them together. When I bought my first house, the appraisal included separate line items for the house vs the land it was on, and the land was a majority of the price I was paying. I don't know what the OP actually meant, but to my own thinking, owning land (in the limit of advanced technology making everything buildable and extractable) means owning some fixed share of Earth's total supply of energy, water, air, and minerals. Building a house, given the space and materials, might become arbitrarily cheap in the future through automation, but competition for space and materials might become arbitrarily intense as the number of competing uses for them increases. Depends a lot on what order things happen in, and whether property rights remain a meaningful concept at all.
Right now, for a few hundred thousand dollars, you can build a home and (if you have enough land) buy enough equipment to make it self-sustaining in food, water, and energy (until things break). In the limit of high technology you can extend that to almost all needs, make the overall system indefinitely self-repairing, and increase carrying capacity of any given plot of land. You can also earn money by selling a flow of excess energy, which may be valuable even to an AI provided the AI respects your rights to same in the first place.
Can someone please elaborate on why physical property might be financial valuable post AGI? I am confused why anything physical could still hold value when full dive VR is possible?
Wouldn't investing 500k in NVIDIA be more financially lucrative than say buying a 500k house?