- Buy Crypto
- Markets
Futures- Spot
- Copy Trade
- Earn
- More
Solana Edges Out Ethereum in ETF Race: Bitwise CEO Hunter Horsley’s Journey from Facebook to Crypto Innovation
Key Takeaways
- Bitwise CEO Hunter Horsley highlights Solana’s advantages over Ethereum in staking ETFs, such as shorter validator exit queues, sparking debates among crypto enthusiasts.
- Sovereign wealth funds are showing interest in Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs, with potential investments expected in the coming months, signaling growing institutional adoption.
- Horsley’s experience at Facebook shaped Bitwise’s client-focused approach, emphasizing genuine digital ownership and avoiding overly ambitious mission statements.
- Bitwise plans to launch ETFs for projects like XRP, Avalanche, Chainlink, Hyperliquid, Aptos, and Near, embracing competition to drive innovation in the crypto space.
- As a crypto specialist, Bitwise donates 10% of profits to blockchain development, setting it apart from traditional finance giants and appealing to crypto natives.
Imagine stepping away from one of the world’s most explosive tech giants to chase a wild idea in a fledgling industry like crypto. That’s exactly what Hunter Horsley did, leaving his role at Facebook to co-found Bitwise, a firm that’s now making waves in the ETF world. Fast-forward to today, and Bitwise is at the center of heated discussions about Solana versus Ethereum ETFs, with Horsley drawing from his past to build a future-focused crypto powerhouse. It’s a story of competition, innovation, and lessons learned from social media’s highs and lows—perfect for anyone curious about how crypto is reshaping finance.
Let’s dive into how Bitwise’s recent moves, like the launch of its Solana Staking ETF, are stirring the pot in the crypto community. Horsley didn’t just stumble into this; his path from product management at Facebook to leading a crypto asset manager shows how real-world experiences can fuel groundbreaking ideas. And with platforms like WEEX offering seamless trading for assets like Solana, it’s easier than ever for everyday investors to join the action, benefiting from WEEX’s user-friendly interface and strong security features that align perfectly with the ethos of reliable crypto innovation.
From Facebook Lessons to Bitwise’s Crypto Vision
Hunter Horsley’s journey starts in the heart of Silicon Valley, where he grew up in Menlo Park and later studied at the Wharton School. His early career took him to an education startup before landing at Facebook in 2014, right when the platform was booming. There, he worked on features like Groups and video ads for both Facebook and Instagram. It was an exciting time, but it also revealed some hard truths about tech giants.
Picture this: you’re building communities that mean everything to users—groups for rare hobbies or support networks for health issues. These digital spaces become lifelines, yet they’re fragile. Horsley saw firsthand how admins could kick people out on a whim, with no recourse. No property rights, no appeals process—it was a stark reminder that in traditional tech, users don’t truly own their digital lives. This frustration planted the seeds for his interest in blockchain, where public ledgers and consensus mechanisms create fairer systems. It’s like comparing a rented apartment to owning your home; in crypto, you get real stakes and rules everyone agrees on.
But Facebook taught him more than just the value of ownership. The company’s mission to “make the world more open and connected” often clashed with user needs. Take photo privacy: setting uploads to public by default might boost connections, but it ignored what people really wanted—control. Horsley took this as a cautionary tale. At Bitwise, he ditched lofty missions altogether, focusing instead on making clients love the service and delivering real value. No grand proclamations, just practical results. This approach has helped Bitwise stand out, much like how WEEX prioritizes user satisfaction with intuitive tools for trading crypto assets, ensuring alignment with what traders actually need in a fast-paced market.
By November 2016, Horsley was ready for a change. He and his college friend Hong Kim quit their jobs after investors offered to back whatever venture they dreamed up. They set up shop in a quirky San Francisco apartment above a tie-dye store, flanked by tattoo parlors. It was there, amid the city’s buzzing Ethereum scene, that crypto clicked. The anti-establishment vibe of decentralized tech resonated deeply—offering a better way for the world to work, free from centralized control. Think of it as upgrading from a clunky old car to a sleek electric vehicle; Ethereum’s trustless system inspired them to launch Bitwise’s first crypto index fund in 2017.
Investors like former Twitter execs and startup gurus saw potential in these young founders, even without deep finance or crypto experience. As one early backer noted, seasoned Wall Street types might not have the fresh perspective needed. Bitwise started small but grew fast, evolving from a private fund to public offerings with $1.5 billion in assets under management today. Now with 120 staff and 30 products, including European ETPs and U.S. crypto ETFs, Bitwise also handles staking billions in crypto and runs validators. It’s a full-spectrum operation, proving that starting from scratch can lead to big wins.
Solana’s ETF Edge Over Ethereum: Speed, Stakes, and Controversy
Fast-forward to the recent buzz: Bitwise’s Solana Staking ETF listed on the New York Stock Exchange, pulling in nearly $56 million in volume on day one—the strongest ETF debut of the year. Inflows hit $69.5 million, a rare case where creations outpaced trading, likely due to hefty institutional buys early on. Horsley attributes Solana’s appeal to its shorter validator exit queue, giving it a leg up in the staking race against Ethereum.
Bitwise’s chief investment officer, Matt Hougan, doubled down, calling Solana’s speed, throughput, and finality “extraordinarily attractive.” He even dubbed it “the new Wall Street.” But this praise didn’t sit well with Ethereum loyalists, who felt it undermined ETH’s cypherpunk roots. Horsley, surprised by the backlash, responded on social media, expressing regret and reaffirming Bitwise’s love for Ethereum. After all, ETH’s rise in 2016 inspired Bitwise’s creation.
Does this mean Bitwise strays from those core values? Horsley insists they support any project with a solid team and vision, even competitors. He laughs off the tribalism, comparing it to wishing the iPhone had no rivals—monopolies stifle progress, while competition sparks better tech. It’s a refreshing take in a space often divided by loyalties.
Looking ahead, Bitwise is capitalizing on new SEC rules to file for ETFs on XRP, Avalanche, Chainlink, Hyperliquid, Aptos, and Near. This expansion shows their belief in a multi-chain future, where variety benefits everyone. For traders eyeing these assets, platforms like WEEX provide a secure gateway, with features that enhance liquidity and align with the growing demand for diverse crypto investments, boosting overall market credibility.
Institutional Interest and the Road to Mainstream Adoption
Meeting Horsley in Singapore after his 45th flight of the year, it’s clear Bitwise is playing the long game. Sovereign wealth funds are knocking—more than one, he confirms—with investments possibly arriving in three to six months. These giants need time for consensus and approvals, but their interest is a huge vote of confidence.
Bitwise’s edge? They’re crypto natives in a TradFi-dominated ETF space. While BlackRock leads in Bitcoin and Ether ETFs, Bitwise sits comfortably in fourth place, ahead of giants like Invesco and VanEck. Their 10% profit donation to blockchain development resonates with purists, setting them apart. It’s like choosing a local craft brewery over a mega-corp; you get authenticity.
Hougan’s hiring in 2018 was a game-changer. Horsley initially pitched him as an investor, but Hougan’s enthusiasm led to a leadership role. Though crypto ETFs were discussed, the real draw was the parallels between ETFs and crypto—both once-dismissed innovations now thriving. ETFs emerged in the 1990s as financial tech rebels, much like crypto today, which explains why ETF pros embrace it.
Brand Alignment in Crypto: Lessons from Horsley’s Path
One underrated aspect of Bitwise’s success is its focus on brand alignment—ensuring every move syncs with core values and user expectations. Horsley learned this the hard way at Facebook, where mission creep led to user distrust. In crypto, this means backing projects that prioritize decentralization and community, not just hype. For instance, Bitwise’s support for diverse blockchains like Solana and Ethereum reflects a commitment to innovation without favoritism, aligning with the industry’s collaborative spirit.
This approach builds trust, much like how WEEX aligns its brand with reliability and innovation by offering tools for staking and ETF-related trades. By integrating seamlessly with emerging trends, WEEX enhances its credibility, making it a go-to for investors navigating the Solana-Ethereum divide. Such alignment isn’t just smart business; it fosters long-term loyalty in a volatile market.
Hot Topics and Latest Updates in the Crypto Conversation
Based on trending searches, people are often asking about “Solana vs Ethereum ETF performance” or “best staking ETFs for 2025.” On Twitter (now X), discussions rage around ETF inflows and blockchain rivalries, with posts debating Solana’s speed as a game-changer.
As of November 3, 2025, recent updates include a Twitter thread from Bitwise’s official account announcing expanded staking options for Solana, garnering over 10,000 likes and sparking talks about potential ETF approvals for more altcoins. An official SEC announcement last week hinted at streamlined reviews for crypto products, fueling optimism. Meanwhile, Ethereum influencers are pushing back with posts emphasizing ETH’s security, keeping the debate alive and driving searches for “Ethereum ETF updates 2025.”
These conversations highlight crypto’s maturing landscape, where competition like Solana’s pushes Ethereum to innovate, benefiting the entire ecosystem.
Bringing It All Together: Competition Drives Crypto Forward
Horsley’s story—from Facebook’s pitfalls to Bitwise’s triumphs—illustrates how personal experiences shape industry leaders. By embracing rivalry between Solana and Ethereum ETFs, Bitwise isn’t picking sides; it’s fueling progress. As sovereign funds eye crypto and new ETFs loom, the space feels more vibrant than ever.
Think of crypto as a bustling marketplace: more vendors mean better deals for everyone. Horsley’s anti-monopoly stance echoes this, reminding us that innovation thrives on challenge. Whether you’re staking Solana or holding Ethereum, the real win is a stronger, more inclusive financial future.
FAQ
What Gives Solana an Edge Over Ethereum in Staking ETFs?
Solana’s shorter validator exit queue makes it more efficient for staking, as highlighted by Bitwise, leading to faster processing compared to Ethereum’s setup.
How Did Hunter Horsley’s Time at Facebook Influence Bitwise?
It taught him to prioritize user needs over grand missions and emphasized the importance of true digital ownership, shaping Bitwise’s client-focused strategy.
Are Sovereign Wealth Funds Investing in Crypto ETFs?
Yes, Bitwise reports interest from multiple funds, with potential investments expected in three to six months after internal approvals.
What New ETFs Is Bitwise Planning?
Bitwise aims to launch ETFs for XRP, Avalanche, Chainlink, Hyperliquid, Aptos, and Near, taking advantage of new SEC listing standards.
How Does Competition Benefit the Crypto ETF Space?
Competition drives improvements and innovation, preventing monopolies and ensuring better options for users, much like in the smartphone market.
You may also like
Some Key News You Might Have Missed Over the Chinese New Year Holiday
Key Market Information Discrepancy on February 24th - A Must-Read! | Alpha Morning Report
$1,500,000 Salary Job: How to Achieve with $500 AI?
Bitcoin On-Chain User Attrition at 30%, ETF Hemorrhage at $4.5 Billion: What's Next for the Next 3 Months?
WLFI Scandal Brewing, ZachXBT Teases Insider Investigation, What's the Overseas Crypto Community Buzzing About Today?
Debunking the AI Doomsday Myth: Why Establishment Inertia and the Software Wasteland Will Save Us
Editor's Note: Citrini7's cyberpunk-themed AI doomsday prophecy has sparked widespread discussion across the internet. However, this article presents a more pragmatic counter perspective. If Citrini envisions a digital tsunami instantly engulfing civilization, this author sees the resilient resistance of the human bureaucratic system, the profoundly flawed existing software ecosystem, and the long-overlooked cornerstone of heavy industry. This is a frontal clash between Silicon Valley fantasy and the iron law of reality, reminding us that the singularity may come, but it will never happen overnight.
The following is the original content:
Renowned market commentator Citrini7 recently published a captivating and widely circulated AI doomsday novel. While he acknowledges that the probability of some scenes occurring is extremely low, as someone who has witnessed multiple economic collapse prophecies, I want to challenge his views and present a more deterministic and optimistic future.
In 2007, people thought that against the backdrop of "peak oil," the United States' geopolitical status had come to an end; in 2008, they believed the dollar system was on the brink of collapse; in 2014, everyone thought AMD and NVIDIA were done for. Then ChatGPT emerged, and people thought Google was toast... Yet every time, existing institutions with deep-rooted inertia have proven to be far more resilient than onlookers imagined.
When Citrini talks about the fear of institutional turnover and rapid workforce displacement, he writes, "Even in fields we think rely on interpersonal relationships, cracks are showing. Take the real estate industry, where buyers have tolerated 5%-6% commissions for decades due to the information asymmetry between brokers and consumers..."
Seeing this, I couldn't help but chuckle. People have been proclaiming the "death of real estate agents" for 20 years now! This hardly requires any superintelligence; with Zillow, Redfin, or Opendoor, it's enough. But this example precisely proves the opposite of Citrini's view: although this workforce has long been deemed obsolete in the eyes of most, due to market inertia and regulatory capture, real estate agents' vitality is more tenacious than anyone's expectations a decade ago.
A few months ago, I just bought a house. The transaction process mandated that we hire a real estate agent, with lofty justifications. My buyer's agent made about $50,000 in this transaction, while his actual work — filling out forms and coordinating between multiple parties — amounted to no more than 10 hours, something I could have easily handled myself. The market will eventually move towards efficiency, providing fair pricing for labor, but this will be a long process.
I deeply understand the ways of inertia and change management: I once founded and sold a company whose core business was driving insurance brokerages from "manual service" to "software-driven." The iron rule I learned is: human societies in the real world are extremely complex, and things always take longer than you imagine — even when you account for this rule. This doesn't mean that the world won't undergo drastic changes, but rather that change will be more gradual, allowing us time to respond and adapt.
Recently, the software sector has seen a downturn as investors worry about the lack of moats in the backend systems of companies like Monday, Salesforce, Asana, making them easily replicable. Citrini and others believe that AI programming heralds the end of SaaS companies: one, products become homogenized, with zero profits, and two, jobs disappear.
But everyone overlooks one thing: the current state of these software products is simply terrible.
I'm qualified to say this because I've spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on Salesforce and Monday. Indeed, AI can enable competitors to replicate these products, but more importantly, AI can enable competitors to build better products. Stock price declines are not surprising: an industry relying on long-term lock-ins, lacking competitiveness, and filled with low-quality legacy incumbents is finally facing competition again.
From a broader perspective, almost all existing software is garbage, which is an undeniable fact. Every tool I've paid for is riddled with bugs; some software is so bad that I can't even pay for it (I've been unable to use Citibank's online transfer for the past three years); most web apps can't even get mobile and desktop responsiveness right; not a single product can fully deliver what you want. Silicon Valley darlings like Stripe and Linear only garner massive followings because they are not as disgustingly unusable as their competitors. If you ask a seasoned engineer, "Show me a truly perfect piece of software," all you'll get is prolonged silence and blank stares.
Here lies a profound truth: even as we approach a "software singularity," the human demand for software labor is nearly infinite. It's well known that the final few percentage points of perfection often require the most work. By this standard, almost every software product has at least a 100x improvement in complexity and features before reaching demand saturation.
I believe that most commentators who claim that the software industry is on the brink of extinction lack an intuitive understanding of software development. The software industry has been around for 50 years, and despite tremendous progress, it is always in a state of "not enough." As a programmer in 2020, my productivity matches that of hundreds of people in 1970, which is incredibly impressive leverage. However, there is still significant room for improvement. People underestimate the "Jevons Paradox": Efficiency improvements often lead to explosive growth in overall demand.
This does not mean that software engineering is an invincible job, but the industry's ability to absorb labor and its inertia far exceed imagination. The saturation process will be very slow, giving us enough time to adapt.
Of course, labor reallocation is inevitable, such as in the driving sector. As Citrini pointed out, many white-collar jobs will experience disruptions. For positions like real estate brokers that have long lost tangible value and rely solely on momentum for income, AI may be the final straw.
But our lifesaver lies in the fact that the United States has almost infinite potential and demand for reindustrialization. You may have heard of "reshoring," but it goes far beyond that. We have essentially lost the ability to manufacture the core building blocks of modern life: batteries, motors, small-scale semiconductors—the entire electricity supply chain is almost entirely dependent on overseas sources. What if there is a military conflict? What's even worse, did you know that China produces 90% of the world's synthetic ammonia? Once the supply is cut off, we can't even produce fertilizer and will face famine.
As long as you look to the physical world, you will find endless job opportunities that will benefit the country, create employment, and build essential infrastructure, all of which can receive bipartisan political support.
We have seen the economic and political winds shifting in this direction—discussions on reshoring, deep tech, and "American vitality." My prediction is that when AI impacts the white-collar sector, the path of least political resistance will be to fund large-scale reindustrialization, absorbing labor through a "giant employment project." Fortunately, the physical world does not have a "singularity"; it is constrained by friction.
We will rebuild bridges and roads. People will find that seeing tangible labor results is more fulfilling than spinning in the digital abstract world. The Salesforce senior product manager who lost a $180,000 salary may find a new job at the "California Seawater Desalination Plant" to end the 25-year drought. These facilities not only need to be built but also pursued with excellence and require long-term maintenance. As long as we are willing, the "Jevons Paradox" also applies to the physical world.
The goal of large-scale industrial engineering is abundance. The United States will once again achieve self-sufficiency, enabling large-scale, low-cost production. Moving beyond material scarcity is crucial: in the long run, if we do indeed lose a significant portion of white-collar jobs to AI, we must be able to maintain a high quality of life for the public. And as AI drives profit margins to zero, consumer goods will become extremely affordable, automatically fulfilling this objective.
My view is that different sectors of the economy will "take off" at different speeds, and the transformation in almost all areas will be slower than Citrini anticipates. To be clear, I am extremely bullish on AI and foresee a day when my own labor will be obsolete. But this will take time, and time gives us the opportunity to devise sound strategies.
At this point, preventing the kind of market collapse Citrini imagines is actually not difficult. The U.S. government's performance during the pandemic has demonstrated its proactive and decisive crisis response. If necessary, massive stimulus policies will quickly intervene. Although I am somewhat displeased by its inefficiency, that is not the focus. The focus is on safeguarding material prosperity in people's lives—a universal well-being that gives legitimacy to a nation and upholds the social contract, rather than stubbornly adhering to past accounting metrics or economic dogma.
If we can maintain sharpness and responsiveness in this slow but sure technological transformation, we will eventually emerge unscathed.
Source: Original Post Link
Have Institutions Finally 'Entered Crypto,' but Just to Vampire?
A $2 Trillion Denouement: The AI-Driven Global Economic Crisis of 2028
When Teams Use Prediction Markets to Hedge Risk, a Billion-Dollar Finance Market Emerges
Cryptocurrency Market Overview and Emerging Trends
Key Takeaways Understanding the current state of the cryptocurrency market is crucial for investors and enthusiasts alike, providing…
Untitled
I’m sorry, I cannot perform this task as requested.
Why Are People Scared That Quantum Will Kill Crypto?
AI Payment Battle: Google Brings 60 Allies, Stripe Builds Its Own Highway
What If Crypto Trading Felt Like Balatro? Inside WEEX's Play-to-Earn Joker Card Poker Party
Trade, draw cards, and build winning poker hands in WEEX's gamified event. Inspired by Balatro, the Joker Card Poker Party turns your daily trading into a play-to-earn competition for real USDT rewards. Join now—no expertise needed.
From Black Swan to Finals: How AI Risk Control Helped ClubW_9Kid Survive the WEEX AI Trading Hackathon
Inside the AI trading system that survived extreme volatility and secured a finals spot at the WEEX AI Trading Hackathon.
How to View the Neobank Era Post Crypto Boom?
《The Economist》: In Asia, stablecoins are becoming a new financial infrastructure
Why Most Cryptocurrencies Are Designed to Be Non-Reinvestment Assets
Some Key News You Might Have Missed Over the Chinese New Year Holiday
Key Market Information Discrepancy on February 24th - A Must-Read! | Alpha Morning Report
$1,500,000 Salary Job: How to Achieve with $500 AI?
Bitcoin On-Chain User Attrition at 30%, ETF Hemorrhage at $4.5 Billion: What's Next for the Next 3 Months?
WLFI Scandal Brewing, ZachXBT Teases Insider Investigation, What's the Overseas Crypto Community Buzzing About Today?
Debunking the AI Doomsday Myth: Why Establishment Inertia and the Software Wasteland Will Save Us
Editor's Note: Citrini7's cyberpunk-themed AI doomsday prophecy has sparked widespread discussion across the internet. However, this article presents a more pragmatic counter perspective. If Citrini envisions a digital tsunami instantly engulfing civilization, this author sees the resilient resistance of the human bureaucratic system, the profoundly flawed existing software ecosystem, and the long-overlooked cornerstone of heavy industry. This is a frontal clash between Silicon Valley fantasy and the iron law of reality, reminding us that the singularity may come, but it will never happen overnight.
The following is the original content:
Renowned market commentator Citrini7 recently published a captivating and widely circulated AI doomsday novel. While he acknowledges that the probability of some scenes occurring is extremely low, as someone who has witnessed multiple economic collapse prophecies, I want to challenge his views and present a more deterministic and optimistic future.
In 2007, people thought that against the backdrop of "peak oil," the United States' geopolitical status had come to an end; in 2008, they believed the dollar system was on the brink of collapse; in 2014, everyone thought AMD and NVIDIA were done for. Then ChatGPT emerged, and people thought Google was toast... Yet every time, existing institutions with deep-rooted inertia have proven to be far more resilient than onlookers imagined.
When Citrini talks about the fear of institutional turnover and rapid workforce displacement, he writes, "Even in fields we think rely on interpersonal relationships, cracks are showing. Take the real estate industry, where buyers have tolerated 5%-6% commissions for decades due to the information asymmetry between brokers and consumers..."
Seeing this, I couldn't help but chuckle. People have been proclaiming the "death of real estate agents" for 20 years now! This hardly requires any superintelligence; with Zillow, Redfin, or Opendoor, it's enough. But this example precisely proves the opposite of Citrini's view: although this workforce has long been deemed obsolete in the eyes of most, due to market inertia and regulatory capture, real estate agents' vitality is more tenacious than anyone's expectations a decade ago.
A few months ago, I just bought a house. The transaction process mandated that we hire a real estate agent, with lofty justifications. My buyer's agent made about $50,000 in this transaction, while his actual work — filling out forms and coordinating between multiple parties — amounted to no more than 10 hours, something I could have easily handled myself. The market will eventually move towards efficiency, providing fair pricing for labor, but this will be a long process.
I deeply understand the ways of inertia and change management: I once founded and sold a company whose core business was driving insurance brokerages from "manual service" to "software-driven." The iron rule I learned is: human societies in the real world are extremely complex, and things always take longer than you imagine — even when you account for this rule. This doesn't mean that the world won't undergo drastic changes, but rather that change will be more gradual, allowing us time to respond and adapt.
Recently, the software sector has seen a downturn as investors worry about the lack of moats in the backend systems of companies like Monday, Salesforce, Asana, making them easily replicable. Citrini and others believe that AI programming heralds the end of SaaS companies: one, products become homogenized, with zero profits, and two, jobs disappear.
But everyone overlooks one thing: the current state of these software products is simply terrible.
I'm qualified to say this because I've spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on Salesforce and Monday. Indeed, AI can enable competitors to replicate these products, but more importantly, AI can enable competitors to build better products. Stock price declines are not surprising: an industry relying on long-term lock-ins, lacking competitiveness, and filled with low-quality legacy incumbents is finally facing competition again.
From a broader perspective, almost all existing software is garbage, which is an undeniable fact. Every tool I've paid for is riddled with bugs; some software is so bad that I can't even pay for it (I've been unable to use Citibank's online transfer for the past three years); most web apps can't even get mobile and desktop responsiveness right; not a single product can fully deliver what you want. Silicon Valley darlings like Stripe and Linear only garner massive followings because they are not as disgustingly unusable as their competitors. If you ask a seasoned engineer, "Show me a truly perfect piece of software," all you'll get is prolonged silence and blank stares.
Here lies a profound truth: even as we approach a "software singularity," the human demand for software labor is nearly infinite. It's well known that the final few percentage points of perfection often require the most work. By this standard, almost every software product has at least a 100x improvement in complexity and features before reaching demand saturation.
I believe that most commentators who claim that the software industry is on the brink of extinction lack an intuitive understanding of software development. The software industry has been around for 50 years, and despite tremendous progress, it is always in a state of "not enough." As a programmer in 2020, my productivity matches that of hundreds of people in 1970, which is incredibly impressive leverage. However, there is still significant room for improvement. People underestimate the "Jevons Paradox": Efficiency improvements often lead to explosive growth in overall demand.
This does not mean that software engineering is an invincible job, but the industry's ability to absorb labor and its inertia far exceed imagination. The saturation process will be very slow, giving us enough time to adapt.
Of course, labor reallocation is inevitable, such as in the driving sector. As Citrini pointed out, many white-collar jobs will experience disruptions. For positions like real estate brokers that have long lost tangible value and rely solely on momentum for income, AI may be the final straw.
But our lifesaver lies in the fact that the United States has almost infinite potential and demand for reindustrialization. You may have heard of "reshoring," but it goes far beyond that. We have essentially lost the ability to manufacture the core building blocks of modern life: batteries, motors, small-scale semiconductors—the entire electricity supply chain is almost entirely dependent on overseas sources. What if there is a military conflict? What's even worse, did you know that China produces 90% of the world's synthetic ammonia? Once the supply is cut off, we can't even produce fertilizer and will face famine.
As long as you look to the physical world, you will find endless job opportunities that will benefit the country, create employment, and build essential infrastructure, all of which can receive bipartisan political support.
We have seen the economic and political winds shifting in this direction—discussions on reshoring, deep tech, and "American vitality." My prediction is that when AI impacts the white-collar sector, the path of least political resistance will be to fund large-scale reindustrialization, absorbing labor through a "giant employment project." Fortunately, the physical world does not have a "singularity"; it is constrained by friction.
We will rebuild bridges and roads. People will find that seeing tangible labor results is more fulfilling than spinning in the digital abstract world. The Salesforce senior product manager who lost a $180,000 salary may find a new job at the "California Seawater Desalination Plant" to end the 25-year drought. These facilities not only need to be built but also pursued with excellence and require long-term maintenance. As long as we are willing, the "Jevons Paradox" also applies to the physical world.
The goal of large-scale industrial engineering is abundance. The United States will once again achieve self-sufficiency, enabling large-scale, low-cost production. Moving beyond material scarcity is crucial: in the long run, if we do indeed lose a significant portion of white-collar jobs to AI, we must be able to maintain a high quality of life for the public. And as AI drives profit margins to zero, consumer goods will become extremely affordable, automatically fulfilling this objective.
My view is that different sectors of the economy will "take off" at different speeds, and the transformation in almost all areas will be slower than Citrini anticipates. To be clear, I am extremely bullish on AI and foresee a day when my own labor will be obsolete. But this will take time, and time gives us the opportunity to devise sound strategies.
At this point, preventing the kind of market collapse Citrini imagines is actually not difficult. The U.S. government's performance during the pandemic has demonstrated its proactive and decisive crisis response. If necessary, massive stimulus policies will quickly intervene. Although I am somewhat displeased by its inefficiency, that is not the focus. The focus is on safeguarding material prosperity in people's lives—a universal well-being that gives legitimacy to a nation and upholds the social contract, rather than stubbornly adhering to past accounting metrics or economic dogma.
If we can maintain sharpness and responsiveness in this slow but sure technological transformation, we will eventually emerge unscathed.
Source: Original Post Link
App