which is far, far safer and easier to coordinate than trying to completely disempower all non-lawyers and take everything from them
But it would probably be a lot less dangerous if lawyers outnumbered non-lawyers by several million, were much smarter, thought faster, had military supremacy, etc. etc. etc.
The truth is, capitalism and property rights has existed for 5000 years and has been fairly robust to about 5 orders of magnitude increase in population
During which time many less-powerful human and non-human populations were in fact destroyed or substantially harmed and disempowered by the people who did well at that system?
it would probably be a lot less dangerous if lawyers outnumbered non-lawyers by several million
well lawyers don’t seem to be on course to specifically target and disempower just the set of people with names beginning with the letter ‘A’ who have green eyes and were born in January either......
Well that would be a rather unnatural conspiracy! IMO you can basically think of law, property rights etc. as being about people getting together to make agreements for their mutual benefit, which can be in the form of ganging up on some subgroup depending on how natural of a Schelling point it is to do that, how well the victims can coordinate, etc. “AIs ganging up on humans” does actually seem like a relatively natural Schelling point where the victims would be pretty unable to respond? Especially if there are systematic differences between the values of a typical human and typical AI, which would make ganging up more attractive. These Schelling points also can arise in periods of turbulence where one system is replaced by another, e.g. colonialism, the industrial revolution. It seems plausible that AIs coming to power will feature such changes(unless you think property rights and capitalism as devised by humans are the optimum of methods of coordination devisable by AIs?)
But it would probably be a lot less dangerous if lawyers outnumbered non-lawyers by several million, were much smarter, thought faster, had military supremacy, etc. etc. etc.
During which time many less-powerful human and non-human populations were in fact destroyed or substantially harmed and disempowered by the people who did well at that system?
well lawyers don’t seem to be on course to specifically target and disempower just the set of people with names beginning with the letter ‘A’ who have green eyes and were born in January either......
Well that would be a rather unnatural conspiracy! IMO you can basically think of law, property rights etc. as being about people getting together to make agreements for their mutual benefit, which can be in the form of ganging up on some subgroup depending on how natural of a Schelling point it is to do that, how well the victims can coordinate, etc. “AIs ganging up on humans” does actually seem like a relatively natural Schelling point where the victims would be pretty unable to respond? Especially if there are systematic differences between the values of a typical human and typical AI, which would make ganging up more attractive. These Schelling points also can arise in periods of turbulence where one system is replaced by another, e.g. colonialism, the industrial revolution. It seems plausible that AIs coming to power will feature such changes(unless you think property rights and capitalism as devised by humans are the optimum of methods of coordination devisable by AIs?)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dred_Scott_v._Sandford says hi.
but this wasn’t a self-enriching conspiracy of lawyers
The African slave trade was certainly a self-enriching conspiracy of white people.
yes, but yet again, it was because of how Africans were not considered part of the system of property rights. They were owned, not owners.