OpenAI just dropped their big “Industrial Policy for the Intelligence Age” document — and it’s clear they’re battening down the hatches for AGI/superintelligence. In this Based Camp episode, Simone & Malcolm Collins break down the proposals, call out the performative elements, and discuss what it really means for jobs, society, wealth distribution, and human flourishing in a post-labor world.

We cover:

- OpenAI’s push for a “people-first” transition (or is it mostly optics?)

- Public wealth funds, robot taxes, 4-day workweeks, and expanded safety nets

- Why AI agents like our Reality Fabricator could replace entire workforces

- The darker implications for demographics, family, and global power

- Risk mitigation, liability, bio/cyber threats, and why meme-layer solutions might matter more than anyone admits

Is this genuine preparation for superintelligence, clever self-preservation by OpenAI, or both? We give our unfiltered take.

Watch until the end for Malcolm’s super-villain island/Charter City vision and what we’d actually build in a post-AI world.

OpenAI’s Document: Industrial Policy for the Intelligence Age

Show Notes

In April, OpenAI released a new document: Industrial Policy for the Intelligence Age: Ideas to Keep People First, which is their crack at launching an early, public conversation about how democratic societies should handle the onset of AGI

They intend to support this agenda through feedback channels, fellowships, research grants, and convenings (e.g., its Washington, DC workshop).

* “OpenAI is: (1) welcoming and organizing feedback through newindustrialpolicy@openai.com; (2) establishing a pilot program of fellowships and focused research grants of up to $100,000 and up to $1 million in API credits for work that builds on these and related policy ideas; and (3) convening discussions at our new OpenAI Workshop opening in May in Washington, DC.”

* There is no actual information about this workshop out there

* Maybe an indication of their not being serious?

They propose AI governance and industrial policy

They imply their proposals will help keep people at the center despite a transition to superintelligence

They put forward an initial portfolio of policy ideas in two areas: “building an open economy” and “building a resilient society,”

What they say they’re optimizing for:

* Broadly sharing prosperity

* Mitigating risks

* Democratizing access and agency

Their case for new industrial policy

Society has navigated major technological transitions before, but not without real disruption and dislocation along the way. While those transitions ultimately created more prosperity, they required proactive political choices to ensure that growth translated into broader opportunity and greater security. For example, following the transition to the Industrial Age, the Progressive Era and the New Deal helped modernize the social contract for a world reshaped by electricity, the combustion engine, and mass production. They did so by building new public institutions, protections, and expectations about what a fair economy should provide, including labor protections, safety standards, social safety nets, and expanded access to education.

“The transition to superintelligence will require an even more ambitious form of industrial policy” they write.

Open Economy Proposals

They acknowledge that the AI boom can severely concentrate wealth

They argue for industrial policy that will”

* “Give workers a voice in the AI transition to make work better and safer, including a formal way to collaborate with management to make sure AI improves job quality, enhances safety, and respects labor rights.”

* “Help workers turn domain expertise into new companies by using AI to handle the overhead that usually blocks entrepreneurship (e.g., accounting, marketing, procurement).”

* “Treat access to AI as foundational for participation in the modern economy, similar to mass eﬀorts to increase global literacy, or to make sure that electricity and the internet reach remote parts of the globe.”

* “rebalance the tax base by increasing reliance on capital-based revenues—such as higher taxes on capital gains at the top, corporate income, or targeted measures on sustained AI-driven returns—and by exploring new approaches such as taxes related to automated labor”

* This is because they acknowledge income-based jobs are going to vaporize

* “These reforms should be paired with wage-linked incentives that encourage firms to retain, retrain, and invest in workers, similar to existing R&D-style credits.”

* Create a Public Wealth Fund that provides every citizen—including those not invested in financial markets—with a stake in AI-driven economic growth.

* Smart move on behalf of AI companies if the financial welbeing of ALL citizens is dependent on their success

* Would be kind of a massive win; if everyone owns you, you own everyone.

* “Establish new public-private partnership models to finance and accelerate the expansion of energy infrastructure required to power AI.”

* No brainer

* “Convert eﬃciency gains from AI into durable improvements in workers’ benefits when routine workload declines and operating costs fall, including incentivizing companies to increase retirement matches or contributions, cover a larger share of healthcare costs, and subsidize child and eldercare. Incentivize employers and unions to run time-bound 32-hour/four-day workweek pilots with no loss in pay that hold output and service levels constant, then convert reclaimed hours into a permanent shorter week, bankable paid time oﬀ, or both. Where helpful, firms could also oﬀer predictable “benefits bonuses” tied to measured productivity improvements so the eﬃciency dividend shows up both as long-term financial security and as time back for workers.”

* This makes me worried

* “Make sure the existing safety net works reliably, quickly, and at scale, because if the transition to superintelligence is going to benefit everyone, the systems designed to provide economic and health security need to deliver without delay or gaps. That starts with unemployment insurance, SNAP, Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare that are not just in place but fully functional, accessible, and responsive to the realities people will face during the transition.”

* THEY WON’T WORK AT SCALE AND I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THEY THINK IS GOING TO FIX THIS

* This implies they expect a huge surge in unemployment, right?

* They propose a metrics-driven, dynamic “package of temporary, [and] expanded safety nets (e.g., expanded or more flexible unemployment benefits, fast cash assistance, wage insurance, training vouchers)”

* “Over time, build benefit systems that are not tied to a single employer by expanding access to healthcare, retirement savings, and skills training through portable accounts that follow individuals across jobs, industries, education programs, and entrepreneurial ventures.”

* This makes sense

* It’s stupid that employers are responsible for this (though I get how and why that happened)

* “Expand opportunities in the care and connection economy—childcare, eldercare, education, healthcare, and community services—as pathways for workers displaced by AI.”

* More atomization

* THOUGH IN FAIRNESS TO THEM, THEY CONTINUE: “These initiatives could be complemented with a family benefit that recognizes caregiving as economically valuable work and supports evolving work patterns. This benefit could help cover childcare, education, and healthcare while remaining compatible with part-time work, retraining, or entrepreneurship”

* “Build a distributed network of AI-enabled laboratories to dramatically expand the capacity to test and validate AI-generated hypotheses at scale.”

* YES

Resilient Society Proposals

This is their diplomatic way of saying: “Risk Mitigation Proposals”

“This is not a new challenge. When transformative technologies have reshaped society in the past, they have introduced new risks alongside new benefits, and new systems were built to manage them as they scaled. As electricity spread, societies built safety standards and regulatory institutions. As automobiles transformed mobility, safety systems reduced risk while preserving freedom of movement. In aviation, continuous monitoring and coordinated response systems made flying one of the safest forms of transportation. In food and medicine, testing and post-market surveillance helped ensure safety in everyday use. In each case, resilience was not automatic—it was built with the luxury of time.”

They propose that governments:

* “Research and develop tools that protect models, detect risks, and prevent misuse across high-consequence domains, including cyber and biological risks as well as other pathways to large-scale harm.”

* “for example, rapid identification and production of medical countermeasures in the event of an outbreak and expanded strategic stockpiles to prepare for future risks”

* YES PLEASE

* “Research and develop systems that help people trust and verify AI systems, the content they produce, and the actions they take—especially as these systems take on more real-world responsibilities”

* “This work could also include developing and testing governance frameworks that clarify responsibility within ...