Wiblin vs Lazar: will the public lose all leverage after superintelligence?

joshalbrecht · x · 2026-10-24

A substantive debate on post-superintelligence outcomes:

Robert Wiblin: even a UBI sustained by charity from those controlling AI and robots leaves the public unable to enforce any agreement—totally dependent on the goodwill of military leaders, oligarchs, or the superintelligence. Today's poor can vote, which is why they get welfare; post-SI they'd lose their vote and credible threat of revolt.
Seth Lazar counters that UBI is already the minimal trade, and calls strong inevitability claims from first-principles reasoning broadly falsified by human social history.
joshalbrecht clarifies: nearly all his optimism comes from human history, while his worries come from first principles—he sees no simple path to a good future and invites point-by-point rebuttals.

More from AGI Musings