Number of words: 258<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As algorithms push humans out of the job market, wealth might become concentrated in the hands of the tiny elite that own the all-powerful algorithms, creating unprecedented social inequality. Alternatively, the algorithms might not only manage businesses, but actually come to own them. At present, human law already recognises inter subjective entities like corporations and nations as \u2018legal persons\u2019. Though Toyota or Argentina has neither a body nor a mind, they are subject to international laws, they can own land and money, and they can sue and be sued in court. We might soon grant similar status to algorithms.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
An algorithm could then own a venture-capital fund without having to obey the wishes of any human master. If the algorithm makes the right decisions, it could accumulate a fortune, which it could then invest as it sees fit, perhaps buying your house and becoming your landlord. If you infringe on the algorithm\u2019s legal rights \u2013 say, by not paying rent \u2013 the algorithm could hire lawyers and sue you in court. If such algorithms consistently outperform human fund managers, we might end up with an algorithmic upper class owning most of our planet. This may sound impossible, but before dismissing the idea, remember that most of our planet is already legally owned by non-human inter-subjective entities, namely nations and corporations. Indeed, 5,000 years ago much of Sumer was owned by imaginary gods such as Enki and Inanna. If gods can possess land and employ people, why not algorithms?<\/p>\n\n\n\n