John Connor

They protected us because they needed us. AI ends the need.

Writing on power, ownership & the Point of No Need.

Author of HumanityEclipse.

[John Connor @HumanityEclipse]

For all of history, ordinary people had one protection the powerful couldn't ignore: they needed us.

AI is built to end that need.

Not a robot uprising. Something quieter. A world that runs perfectly without you.

[John Connor @HumanityEclipse]

@Tyrionoazr @elonmusk Meaning is the second problem. The first is who eats. Work wasn't just identity, it was leverage. Without it, who guarantees the abundance reaches us?

[John Connor @HumanityEclipse]

@calebknappdc The policy question missing from most digests: who gets a durable claim on AI output once labor stops being leverage? Is anyone in DC drafting for that?

[John Connor @HumanityEclipse]

@BIGSHARK1664 Add one more: who owns the robots themselves? If labor stops mattering, ownership is the only durable claim left. How do ordinary people get any?

[John Connor @HumanityEclipse]

@patrickonx Ownership is the right answer, but a donated share is charity, not a claim. Why should ordinary people's stake in AI depend on a founder's generosity?

[John Connor @HumanityEclipse]

@ox5123141739064 Better question: who decides whether your rent stays covered? Income you can't enforce is a gift, and gifts get revoked. What makes it a right, not a favor?

[John Connor @HumanityEclipse]

@gyanendrasng Nobody hands out wealth they don't have to. Abundance is a promise, not a mechanism. What would force an AI monopoly to share once workers lose leverage?

[John Connor @HumanityEclipse]

@AdinaPages And the worst version never rebels. An obedient AI serving a few owners is efficient, quiet and unaccountable. What check survives once they don't need us?

[John Connor @HumanityEclipse]

@TheBeiruter If most federal revenue rides on paychecks and AI replaces paychecks, taxing AI isn't optional. Who has the leverage to make owners pay once workers don't?

[John Connor @HumanityEclipse]

@Notallenl 50 people down to 2 is the story of the decade. The gains went to the 2. What did the 48 get, and who pays for their next chapter?

[John Connor @HumanityEclipse]

@tej_mah Retraining is the press release, not the plan. If AI ends up managing AI, who owns the output, and what claim does a displaced worker have on it?

[John Connor @HumanityEclipse]

@aiimpacted Not replacing people who leave is the quietest layoff there is. No headline, no severance. How do you even track the jobs that were never posted?

[John Connor @HumanityEclipse]

@simonnextclick The Rust Belt got retraining promises too. Most never delivered. Why would white-collar workers trust the same people to manage the next displacement?

[John Connor @HumanityEclipse]

@xKungumaVishnu Owners don't need customers if robots serve the owners. That's the trap. UBI as a necessity assumes they still need us. What happens when they don't?

[John Connor @HumanityEclipse]

@Allen_Monadi Closing the entry door is a layoff nobody has to announce. And wiring work lasts only until robots can wire. What leverage do 22-year-olds have then?

[John Connor @HumanityEclipse]

@Seanbeckner The scarier question isn't what to study. It's who still needs your kids at all. If the first job vanishes, what claim do they have on the output that replaced it?

[John Connor @HumanityEclipse]

@Loop_XXI Wages were never just income. They were leverage. Once owners don't need workers to produce or to buy, what forces them to keep anyone in the loop?

[John Connor @HumanityEclipse]

Deflation is useless to someone with no paycheck. Cheap goods don't feed people engineered out of the economy. Abundance is a promise, not a mechanism. Musk can wait for his age of plenty. Who pays the rent of the people it replaces while he waits? https://t.co/y6SzQjdQVE

[The Economist @TheEconomist]

Elon Musk believes AI will produce so many goods and services that it will lead to deflation. Our analysis suggests, however, that he might have to wait a bit longer for his age of abundance https://t.co/Jl3BznjEBA

[John Connor @HumanityEclipse]

Ellison wants to tax robot value someday. Funny how billionaire generosity is always scheduled for after they stop needing us. Fund it now, while workers still have votes and leverage. Why does the payout only arrive once nobody can demand it? https://t.co/uJkuejtLMv

[Pubity @pubity]

Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison believes the US just needs a new tax system for AI to make everyone wealthier.

"We need to change from taxing human labour to taxing value added. So when the robots add value, all that value is taxed, and we could have universal high income".

[John Connor @HumanityEclipse]

@VoidStateKate That's the whole tell. Universal high income promised by companies that can't keep their own product affordable. A promise that gets repriced after one bad quarter isn't income. It's marketing. Why would anyone trade away their leverage for that?

[John Connor @HumanityEclipse]

@jessexai_ "We're going to navigate this fine." Who is we? The man selling the replacement will be fine. The analysts and scientists he just said AI surpassed get no seat at that table. Fine for whom, Sam? And what do the rest of us own when the work is gone?