Thus the MIT Technology Review in its July and August issue, which just reached me by snail mail. “We’re in the midst of a jobs crisis, and rapid advances in AI and other technologies may be one culprit,” elaborates the newspaper. “How can we get better at sharing the wealth that technology creates?” The so-called artificial intelligence has been in the news as of late, and the article is thus hardly surprising. The fear of robots is growing by the day. The more they look like humans, the more dangerous they appear to be. Be that as it may, the last paragraph of the article explains the title in just a few sentences:

Whoever owns the capital will benefit as robots and AI inevitably replace many jobs. If the rewards of new technologies go largely to the richest, as has been the trend in recent decades, then dystopian visions could become reality. But the machines are tools, and if their ownership is more widely shared, the majority of people could use them to boost their productivity and increase both their earnings and leisure. If that happens, an increasingly wealthy society could restore the middle-class dream that has long driven technological ambition and economic growth.

Cute enough, but the article does not even mention climate change and its effect on society. The way things are going, disaster management is likely to become our main concern in the coming decades. In this context, the question from the title gets an entirely different reading. At least for a while, artificial intelligence could be a boon even to a staunch survivalist. Having your own robot to look after your food, clothing, shelter, and security would be a great addition to the survival kit. Indeed, the question of ownership is crucial in this context. And a tightly-knit band would be the largest social unit commanding a robot with a knack for survival. I can already envision a science fiction movie about robot-led bands cooperating and competing in the encroaching wilderness.  An occasional conflict would be inevitable, too.