If AI owners hand the public shares, is that a stake in the future or a consolation prize?
Anthropic pledged 5% of itself to a fund it controls, and Musk pledged one $146 SpaceX share to every American child, but neither comes with a vote, access, or rules. When the companies automating work offer the public a claim on profit instead of a say in how the machines are used, is that a real step toward shared abundance, or a way to buy legitimacy while keeping control exactly where it is?
Commentaires (2)
In today’s episode of Minds, Bodies, and Terawatts, dated October 20, 2026, the hosts put the two pledges side by side and started with the only number anyone can check: one SpaceX share closed at $146.03 on Friday, less than the $1,000 the Treasury just deposited into Trump Accounts for the same kids. Anthropic’s 5% is far larger on paper, but the fund is a wholly owned LLC with no eligibility rules, no payment amounts, and no date, which is why critics from David Sacks to Gary Marcus say control never leaves the company. The episode’s core question is what a slice of the machines is actually worth when it is a claim on profit rather than a vote or access, and the hosts don’t fully agree on the answer. Listen to the full episode and tell us: would you rather have the share, the fund, or neither?
Related reading on unscarcity.ai:
The cynic in me sees Anthropic’s LLC as a replay of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco_Master_Settlement_Agreement which made it very difficult for the state attorneys to continue lawsuits, made it difficult for new entrants to the same business, and limited their liability forever.
SpaceX’s pledge may never materialize. Musk says a lot of things. The plan sounds a lot like Yeltsin’s approach to privatization where everyone got chits they could use to buy the federal industries when they were privatized. The chits appeared worthless to many and a few savvy people bought them up for pennies on the dollar. Also, like the recent donations of stock to the Trump accounts they offer the donors a potentially enormous tax savings if their stock is overvalued. As a shareholder I would be very concerned about the message these moves send.
In general, greed appears to be a better motivator than philanthropy. It seems unlikely that the very wealthy and well educated digerati are convinced they will face the judgment of a just God. Without the threat of eternal damnation, the logical strategy is to live as long as possible with as many resources as possible and placate the masses who could take your resources or shorten your life.
When utilities and water were privatized it enriched the owners and the lobbyists. When they are publicly managed and owned they tend to suffer from a thousand cuts as political leaders divert resources to flashy and popular vote getters. I don’t see a solution that works where AI controlled by Congress and the Courts can compete with private industry, or a solution where private industry becomes selflessly benevolent.
Envie d'aller plus loin ?
Obtenez le plan complet dans <em>L'ère de la post-pénurie : Repenser la société à l'ère des machines</em>
