Why are Tech billionaires obsessed with Doomsday bunkers?
And why are self-driving taxis being lit on fire?
We all know Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk have a hard-on for colonizing Mars. And hey, if you can afford the intergalactic travel, it makes sense? I mean, there’s gotta be so many things…to…do…there. But, for many tech bros, Mars isn’t attractive. No, the world’s richest men are all quietly building doomsday bunkers.
Mark Zuckerberg spent $100 million on a compound in Hawaii. Here’s a picture of the guard tower overseeing the compound. Pretty cute, right?
Peter Thiel, one of the OGS of Silicon Valley, is trying to build a bunker in New Zealand, a place he believes is safe from environmental collapse. His plans were met with backlash, as they would have (ironically) messed with New Zealand’s environment.
And then there’s Sam Altman. The founder of OpenAI is a well-documented doomsday prepper. So, I have to know! What are his bunker dreams?
“I have like structures,” he joked in an interview, “but I wouldn’t say a bunker.”
Pretty funny joke!
(Reports suggest he and Peter Thiel have an agreement.)
But wait, what agreement? What are all of the richest men concerned about?
Take a seat, dear reader, and gaze upon this burning self-driving taxi.
Richard Rushkoff’s book, “Survival of the Richest,” posits that the world’s wealthiest men are concerned about one thing. Hell. I wouldn’t even call it a concern. These billionaires are obsessed with the moment their technology leads to massive job loss and societal collapse. The reason for their underground bunkers and large guarded compounds is clear. They have to keep out the angry poor people when shit hits the fan.
The WSJ recently reported that Sam Altman wants to raise 7 trillion dollars for computer chips. His company’s artificial intelligence plans are so resource-intensive that if he wants to get to AGI (the moment computers are more intelligent than humans) — he will need much more computing power.
But this drive toward automation is nothing new. Richard Rushkoff’s book reveals that every startup company looking for venture capitalist cash in Silicon Valley has one major requirement. They must prove their business will eventually become fully automated.
You won't get that money if you can’t prove you're eliminating humans.
So, not only are the richest men in tech rapidly pushing for AGI, which they believe will lead to societal collapse, but they’re also indoctrinating this worldview into every new startup that enters Silicon Valley. Very cool!
So, what do we do with this information? Besides, say, inquiring about a Xanax prescription?
Oh, hey, remember that burning self-driving taxi?
This was San Francisco last month, where a crowd set a self-driving taxi on fire. A taxi made by Waymo.
I’m no fan of self-driving vehicles. I don’t trust them on the road with my family. Waymo’s vehicles in particular have already struck cyclists. And city workers don’t seem into them either.
But I believe the unrest in San Fransisco is related to human job loss. The way I see it:
Uber/Lyft can drive taxis out of business. And we’re fine with it.
Uber/Lyft can spend millions of dollars in political ads to stop drivers from gaining basic employee rights, and we’re fine with it. Hell, we’ll vote for it in California because the ads were misleading.
But if you eliminate a class of drivers you created by replacing them with a self-driving taxi…Your shit is getting set on fire.
On Friday, I was driving in Los Angeles and saw a curious sight. A man driving a Waymo self-driving taxi. Huh? What was that about?
That night, at midnight, the Los Angeles Times posted this:
And Kudos to Waymo. Having this unpopular news drop at midnight on a Friday before Super Tuesday. Chef’s kiss.
But, as my city reaches unprecedented levels of unhoused people, with multiple industries decimated by late-stage capitalism. I wonder, dear reader, how Los Angeles will react to a job-killing car?
What are your thoughts? Message me directly or leave a comment below!