- Buy Crypto
- Markets
Futures- Spot
- Copy Trade
- Earn
- More
Understanding Bitcoin CME Gaps: A Guide to Trading Them in 2025
Bitcoin CME gaps might sound like a mysterious puzzle in the crypto world, but they’re actually fascinating opportunities born from the clash between nonstop digital markets and traditional trading hours. Imagine the crypto scene as a 24/7 party that never sleeps, while places like the Chicago Mercantile Exchange take weekends off— that’s where these gaps emerge, creating thrilling moments for traders. As of August 13, 2025, with Bitcoin’s price hovering around $60,000 amid ongoing market volatility, understanding these gaps can feel like unlocking a secret strategy. They offer both exciting wins and tricky hurdles, drawing in everyone from seasoned pros to curious newcomers eager to navigate the unpredictable waves of cryptocurrency trading.
Explaining Bitcoin CME Gaps in Depth
Picture Bitcoin CME gaps as those empty spaces on a price chart, representing the jump between where Bitcoin closes on one trading day and opens on the next at the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, a massive global hub for financial derivatives, commodities, and investment tools. These gaps pop up because cryptocurrencies trade around the clock, even on weekends, while the CME sticks to its weekday schedule. This mismatch often leads to noticeable differences, especially between Friday’s close and Monday’s open.
Traders love spotting these on Bitcoin charts by eyeing the variance in those Friday close and Monday open levels. Think of them as potential road signs— they can act as future support or resistance zones, guiding where prices might bounce or stall. And yes, they come in varieties: common gaps that fill up fast during everyday market swings, breakaway gaps signaling a powerful new trend amid big price shifts, and exhaustion gaps hinting at a trend’s end and a possible turnaround. When we talk about a gap getting “filled,” it’s like the price circling back to erase that empty spot.
This kind of CME gap analysis blends seamlessly with broader technical strategies, helping traders forecast moves and make smarter calls in crypto’s wild ride. It’s like having an extra layer of insight, turning chaos into calculated plays.
The Rich History Behind Trading on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange
The story of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange starts way back in 1898 as the Chicago Butter and Egg Board, evolving over decades by expanding into more agricultural goods. By 1919, after teaming up with the Chicago Produce Exchange, it officially became the CME we know today. The real game-changer came in the 1970s with financial futures on things like currencies and interest rates, revolutionizing finance and leading to a 2007 merger with giants like the Chicago Board of Trade, New York Mercantile Exchange, and Commodity Exchange Inc. to form the powerhouse CME Group.
Fast-forward to December 2017, when CME dove into crypto by launching Bitcoin futures, bridging digital assets with old-school markets and boosting crypto’s credibility. This let investors, big and small, bet on Bitcoin’s future prices without holding the actual coins. Driven by surging interest in digital investments, it also opened doors for hedging risks. Since then, CME has kept innovating— in 2021, they rolled out micro Bitcoin futures, which are just a tenth the size of regular ones, making trading more flexible and precise while keeping benefits like regulated settlements via the CME CF Bitcoin Reference Rate, pegged to Bitcoin’s USD price at 4:00 p.m. London time.
Looking at 2022 and 2023, CME’s crypto scene exploded with growth. They introduced event contracts on Bitcoin futures in March 2023, giving traders fresh ways to tap into price action. By mid-2023, amid spiking Bitcoin and Ether prices and wild volatility, trading volumes and open interest in CME’s crypto futures and options skyrocketed, fueled by demand for hedging tools. This trend underscores how institutions are flocking to trusted, regulated spots to handle risks.
Fast-forward to 2025, and the momentum continues. Recent data from CME Group shows a 25% year-over-year increase in Bitcoin futures trading volume as of Q2 2025, with open interest hitting record highs above 20,000 contracts, according to their latest quarterly report. This surge aligns with Bitcoin’s recovery from early-year dips, driven by factors like ETF approvals and macroeconomic shifts. On Twitter, discussions have been buzzing— a viral post from @CMEGroup on August 10, 2025, announced expanded Ether options, garnering over 50,000 likes and sparking debates on how these tools could stabilize portfolios amid inflation worries. Frequently searched Google queries like “Do Bitcoin CME gaps always fill?” and “Best strategies for trading CME gaps in 2025” reflect growing curiosity, with experts noting that while not all gaps fill (only about 70% do, per historical chart data from TradingView), they remain a hot topic amid Bitcoin’s push toward $100,000 predictions.
Key Factors Shaping CME Gaps in Crypto Markets
CME gaps in Bitcoin don’t just appear out of thin air; they’re influenced by a mix of elements that make trading them both intriguing and complex. The round-the-clock crypto trading clashes with CME’s weekend closures, naturally birthing those weekend gaps. Market mood plays a huge role too— sudden news or events during off-hours can spark wild price swings, leaving gaps in their wake.
Liquidity shifts also matter; lighter trading from Friday close to Monday open can widen these disparities. Add in technical aspects like established support and resistance lines, which sway how traders react. Together, these create gaps that traders watch closely, often filling them as the market adjusts, turning analysis into a dynamic part of crypto strategy. It’s like comparing a calm river to a raging storm— the factors can either smooth out the flow or whip up turbulence, rewarding those who read the signs right.
Essential Tools for Spotting Bitcoin CME Gaps
To tackle Bitcoin CME gaps effectively, traders weave together a toolkit that includes technical indicators, fundamental insights, and sentiment checks for a well-rounded view. Tools like moving averages and Bollinger Bands help gauge if a gap might fill, signaling potential reversals or trend strengths— imagine them as compasses pointing out hidden paths in the price landscape.
Fundamental analysis dives into news, regulations, and economic trends affecting Bitcoin, providing the backstory that explains gap behaviors. For instance, recent regulatory nods, like the SEC’s 2025 approvals for more crypto ETFs, have influenced gap formations by boosting investor confidence. Sentiment analysis taps into the crowd’s vibe via social media buzz or indicators; positive waves might predict upward gap fills, while negativity could foreshadow drops. Blending these is like assembling a puzzle— each piece adds clarity, helping traders anticipate moves with evidence-backed confidence.
In this evolving space, platforms like WEEX exchange stand out for their seamless integration of these tools. As a user-friendly crypto trading hub, WEEX offers real-time charting with advanced indicators, low-fee futures trading, and robust risk management features that align perfectly with spotting and acting on CME gaps. Its commitment to security and innovation has built trust among traders, making it a go-to for executing strategies efficiently while navigating market volatility— truly enhancing your trading journey with reliability and ease.
Strategies for Trading Bitcoin CME Gaps Successfully
Trading Bitcoin CME gaps is all about decoding those price jumps between CME closes and opens, then positioning yourself for the expected shifts. A key approach is betting on gap fills, where prices retreat to cover the void, treating the gap as a support or resistance marker. It’s persuasive to think of it as the market’s way of correcting itself, much like how a rubber band snaps back after stretching.
For a bullish gap— say Bitcoin closes at $20,000 one day and opens at $21,000 the next— traders might buy near that $21,000 level, anticipating a dip back to $20,000 for profit. Conversely, in a bearish setup closing at $20,000 and opening at $19,000, selling near $19,000 could target a rise to $20,000. Here, “buy high” or “sell low” relative to the gap means capitalizing on retracements, backed by historical data showing gaps fill over 70% of the time in trending markets, per analyses from sources like Investopedia.
Layer in market sentiment, technical signals, and trends for sharper decisions, and always weave in risk controls like stop-losses to guard against surprises if the gap lingers. Real-world examples abound: During Bitcoin’s 2024 rally, a CME gap from $55,000 to $58,000 filled within days, rewarding patient traders with quick gains. This isn’t just speculation; it’s grounded in patterns observed across thousands of charts, making it a compelling tactic for those who manage risks wisely.
Navigating the Challenges of Trading Bitcoin CME Gaps
Diving into Bitcoin CME gaps comes with its share of hurdles that test even the sharpest traders. The crypto market’s wild swings can turn gaps into unpredictable beasts, leading to sudden price jolts that defy expectations. Liquidity dips during off-hours might cause slippage, messing with trade executions and outcomes.
Not every gap fills, which can lead to misleading signals and dashed hopes— some stay open for weeks or never close, challenging your forecasts. External shocks, like surprise regulations or news bombs, can derail anticipated moves. It’s a speculative arena, demanding solid risk strategies; setting firm stop-losses is crucial to cap losses if things go south. Overcoming this requires blending technical skills, market awareness, and disciplined risk handling— think of it as sailing through stormy seas, where preparation turns potential pitfalls into triumphs.
This article does not contain investment advice or recommendations. Every investment and trading move involves risk, and readers should conduct their own research when making a decision.
Frequently Asked Questions About Bitcoin CME Gaps
What causes Bitcoin CME gaps to form, and how often do they occur?
Bitcoin CME gaps form mainly due to the 24/7 crypto trading clashing with CME’s weekday-only hours, amplified by weekend news or liquidity changes. They happen frequently, especially after volatile weekends, with data showing an average of 2-3 notable gaps per month in active markets.
Do all Bitcoin CME gaps get filled, and what’s the best way to predict that?
Not all gaps fill— historical trends indicate about 70% do, often within days or weeks, depending on market trends. To predict, combine technical indicators like moving averages with sentiment analysis; strong trends increase fill likelihood, but always use stop-losses for protection.
How can beginners start trading Bitcoin CME gaps safely?
Beginners should study charts on platforms like TradingView, practice with demo accounts, and focus on common gaps for simpler plays. Start small, incorporate risk management, and learn from real examples— remember, education and patience are key to avoiding common pitfalls in this volatile space.
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