> With the billion dollars in hand, the future of you, and everyone else is worse off, because you focused too much on marketing rather than on groundbreaking research.
I don't think so. More likely, we're playing a massively multiplayer Prisoner's Dilemma, where too few of us collaborate. Sure, if a sufficient proportion of humanity worked at making the world a better place instead of trying to get richer, even they would be better off. I doubt however that we're even close to that critical mass.
Also, don't forget that grounbreaking discoveries are science fiction until they're not. No one plans for science fiction. Heck, even the eventual obsolescence of drivers (truck, taxi, bus) is widely perceived as science fiction, even though self-driving exist today. Because, you know, "there always will be the need for human intervention". (Even then, it wouldn't mean a human is needed in the damn truck all the freaking time. The truck can make a phone call when it has a problem.)
I don't think so. More likely, we're playing a massively multiplayer Prisoner's Dilemma, where too few of us collaborate. Sure, if a sufficient proportion of humanity worked at making the world a better place instead of trying to get richer, even they would be better off. I doubt however that we're even close to that critical mass.
Also, don't forget that grounbreaking discoveries are science fiction until they're not. No one plans for science fiction. Heck, even the eventual obsolescence of drivers (truck, taxi, bus) is widely perceived as science fiction, even though self-driving exist today. Because, you know, "there always will be the need for human intervention". (Even then, it wouldn't mean a human is needed in the damn truck all the freaking time. The truck can make a phone call when it has a problem.)