This highlights a few under-appreciated aspects of AI and growth. 1) an increase from 2 to 2.5% growth has HUGE economic implications (and I think it’ll be higher). It may seem like a small number but given the size of an advanced economy like the US, this will lead to large and visible changes to well being. 2) disruptive technology shocks are *necessary* to sustain growth. Without disruptive shocks, growth doesn’t stay steady, there is sclerosis in the economy and it will stagnate and eventually shrink. Unlike what some folks like to argue, this would be a *very bad thing*—most of our social programs and public goods depend on sustained or increasing growth.

@sebkrier I don't think that argument clearly holds, as the increase isn't actually permanent.

I liked @tobyordoxford's post on this topic (https://www.tobyord.com/writing/progress), and especially his analogy to skipping the first song on an album.

@alexolegimas 💯 Incidentally this number is @tylercowen's expectation (AGI Economy speech, 21 May 2026). His illustration: this difference means the US debt, rather than exploding, actually converges⏬

Is it technology that drives sustained growth? or is it epistemic infrastructure that better converts novel insight — likely scientific — into useful knowledge that an economy can then apply and iterate on?

I am not in the moaar technology camp as the end in itself. Rather the knowledge camp, a consequence of which is technology vibrancy.

@alexolegimas What is AI? How will it lead to increased productivity?

@sebkrier There's always one argument missing from the AI economic debate and that's this: we speak a lot about AI solving problems intellectually (e.g. "know how to cure most cancers"), but the implementation part (those who would go about making machines, devices, molecules) is ignored

@sebkrier I really wish more people didn't hand-wave this, I think questions like "how exactly are we going to house people" and "how can we deliver cures for disease X to this place where people don't trust doctors" are infinitely more important. You can be very smart and not helpful

@aiamblichus if this was true, it would be an even worse idea to give this oligarchy control to pause the tech

@azeem @mattsclancy I’m in the same camp. In economic models, new knowledge is a necessary condition for technological shocks. That’s what’s meant by “shock”—new knowledge on how to do things better or make possible to do brand new things. That’s what sustains or increases growth.

@sebkrier given that the west is presently run by a shamelessly self-dealing oligarchic elite, it seems unlikely that the benefits of any such progress would be shared with the bulk of the population

russians benefit only marginally from their country's gdp growth. we are all russia now

@eniquua True! I think people in AI obsess over the R&D part and neglect the deployment/adoption side also.

@sebkrier @tobyordoxford Toby notes that the sign of progress depends on your views about the end of humanity. Ironically, if you adopt Tyler Cowen's view (that extinction will be technologically driven, and arrive within a millennium), then progress looks unappealing!

@sebkrier But by the same token, actions which reduce the probability of extinction by a small amount give us access to near-infinite future utility, right? @mattsclancy

@Dr_Gingerballs @alexolegimas It's a means to hyperscale the tokenization of SAS to create CRMs that offer the real time dimension of scaling compute and make stock growth more accessible. Got it?

@sebkrier A similar argument has been made about reducing the risk of extinction by 1% (or 0.01%). I don't see why you would find one so convincing and dismiss the other. Variations in economic growth have been with us a long time, whereas credible total-extinction threats are <100y old.

@eniquua I agree

@alexolegimas @mattsclancy Single digit percentage point increase in growth also still permits the time necessary for societies to adapt somewhat (your point in the odd lots podcast) Two digit growth would imply so many labor market and build infrastructure disruptions, most have no idea

@sebkrier Hmm, trying to get people to look at the subtle benefits in life trajectory AI has afforded them, and explain that's happening to everyone everywhere but the GDP's going to be slow catching on.

@sebkrier stubborn attachments has never been more relevant, although the things we need to let go of seem less irrational on this precipice

@sebkrier Exp is amazing. At 2% economic growth a year since the Christ was born, global GDP would now be ninety quintillion (9 + 19 zeros) dollars per capita 😀