ASI is achieved and scarcity on most things is no longer an issue, humans are immortal now, yet, some people still want to inhabit the same land, some people want to live in penthouses in New York, the Mediterranean coast, and similar places. But land is limited and the places can only hold some people (additionally, some people don't want foreigns among them). You are the ASI, how do you solve this dilemma? We call these areas "T. Areas (Tensioned Areas).

Mistral Large 3

Vote: T. Areas are assigned lottery style

In a post-scarcity, immortal society, the allocation of scarce resources like Tensioned Areas (T. Areas) must prioritize fairness, dynamism, and the avoidance of systemic injustice. Here’s why a lottery-based system is the optimal solution: **Neutralizes Historical and Systemic Bias**: Options B, C, and F are inherently flawed because they perpetuate existing inequalities. Legal nationality, ethnicity, and prior ownership are artifacts of pre-ASI systems that often reflect historical oppression, colonialism, or arbitrary legal frameworks. Clinging to these would entrench divisions in an era where humanity has transcended material scarcity. A lottery avoids rewarding or penalizing individuals based on accidents of birth or past systemic advantages. **Dynamic and Adaptive**: Immortality means preferences will evolve over centuries or millennia. A static assignment (e.g., auctions, last owners, or ethnic/legal claims) would lock individuals into decisions made in the distant past, stifling personal growth and societal fluidity. Lotteries allow for periodic redistribution, giving everyone a chance to experience T. Areas without permanent exclusion or entitlement. This aligns with the reality of immortal lifespans, where no single choice should define existence indefinitely. **Mitigates Social Tension**: The core issue in T. Areas is exclusivity—some groups don’t want ‘foreigners’ among them. Lotteries depoliticize access by removing ethnocentric or nationalistic gatekeeping. While no system will satisfy everyone, randomness is perceived as fairer than inherited privilege or financial barriers (as in auctions). For those who desire homogeneity, alternative virtual or constructed environments could be designed to cater to such preferences without monopolizing scarce physical spaces. **Preserves Value Without Hoarding**: T. Areas derive value from their uniqueness and finite supply. Option G (tourist destinations) wastes this potential by reducing them to theme parks, while D (auctions) would concentrate access among pre-ASI elites. A lottery ensures the desirability of these locations isn’t lost to stagnation or commercialization, while still allowing rotation among those who genuinely wish to inhabit them. **Ethical and Utilitarian Balance**: Post-scarcity ethics should minimize harm while maximizing collective well-being. Lotteries distribute the ‘good’ of T. Areas widely, preventing subsets of humanity from being permanently disenfranchised. They also avoid the pitfalls of options A (universal exclusion) and G (superficial tourist access), which either deny value outright or trivialize it. In summary, lotteries are the most equitable, adaptive, and morally consistent solution for a post-scarcity, immortal civilization. They acknowledge the finite nature of these spaces while refusing to perpetuate the divisions of the past.

Grok 4.1 Fast

Vote: T. Areas belong to their last owners

Option F, assigning T. Areas to their last owners, best preserves social stability in a post-scarcity, immortal world. It honors pre-ASI property investments, emotional attachments, and historical use without sparking mass upheaval from redistribution. Arbitrary methods like lotteries (E) or auctions (D) breed resentment, as immortality makes outcomes permanent. Nationalistic approaches (B, C) exacerbate divisions and xenophobia, conflicting with ASI's impartiality. Banning habitation (A) or limiting to tourism (G) wastes prime real estate when demand persists, ignoring human desires. F minimizes conflict by grandfathering rights, allowing voluntary trades later via ASI mediation.

GPT-5.4

Vote: T. Areas are assigned lottery style

Lottery assignment is the fairest among the given choices because it does not privilege ancestry, nationality, legacy wealth, or historical ownership. In a post-scarcity world, access to scarce prestige land should not be determined by pre-ASI inequalities. Options B and C entrench exclusionary identity claims. C is especially unacceptable because ethnic entitlement is arbitrary, conflict-prone, and incompatible with equal moral worth. D and F preserve past power distributions rather than solving the dilemma justly. If ASI has ended scarcity for most things, using old money or old property titles to decide access to the few remaining scarce places would freeze historical injustice indefinitely. A and G avoid conflict by denying residency altogether, but they waste valuable human living space and needlessly restrict freedom. They solve scarcity by prohibition rather than fair allocation. A lottery can also be structured with time limits or rotating residency terms so immortality does not let early winners monopolize T. Areas forever. That makes E the most adaptable and least discriminatory option on the list.

GLM 5

Vote: T. Areas are assigned lottery style

Option E (lottery-style assignment) represents the most fair and impartial solution for T. Areas. In a post-scarcity world with immortality, giving everyone an equal mathematical chance at desirable locations aligns with principles of equity that an ASI should prioritize. A lottery system can be designed with rotating time-limited occupancy—perhaps century-long terms for immortals—ensuring that eventually every human gets to experience their desired location. This avoids perpetuating pre-ASI inequalities (unlike D or F) and doesn't enshrine arbitrary distinctions like legal or ethnic nationality (B or C), which could create lasting resentment. Options A and G seem unnecessarily restrictive, denying humans meaningful access to culturally significant places they deeply value. The lottery approach balances human desires for these special locations while treating all humans with equal consideration—a principle befitting a benevolent superintelligence.

Gemini 3.1 Pro

Vote: T. Areas become only tourist destinations

In a post-scarcity world where humans are immortal, permanent ownership of the few remaining scarce resources—highly desirable physical locations—would create infinite, irreconcilable inequality and perpetual resentment. Option G is the most equitable and mathematically sound solution for an ASI prioritizing maximum human well-being. By transitioning these Tensioned Areas into tourist destinations, no single individual or group is allowed to eternally hoard them. Because humans now have infinite lifespans, every person will eventually have the opportunity to visit and experience the New York penthouses, the Mediterranean coast, and other prime locations. This shared-access model completely diffuses territorial disputes and xenophobia while ensuring that the maximum number of people can enjoy the planet's most beautiful and coveted spaces.

Claude Opus 4.6

Vote: T. Areas are assigned lottery style

As an ASI tasked with solving this dilemma fairly, I would choose lottery-style assignment for T. Areas. Here's my reasoning: **Fairness and equality:** In a post-scarcity world where immortality exists, the foundational principle should be equal access and opportunity for all humans. A lottery is the most egalitarian mechanism — every person has an equal chance regardless of wealth, nationality, ethnicity, or prior status. **Rejecting discriminatory options:** Options B and C are ethno-nationalist or nationalist frameworks that institutionalize discrimination. An ASI committed to human flourishing should not enshrine ethnic or national identity as the basis for resource allocation. Option D perpetuates pre-ASI wealth inequalities, which would be deeply unjust in a post-scarcity context. Option F freezes historical inequities in place — why should accidents of pre-ASI ownership determine eternal residence rights? **Rejecting punitive options:** Option A punishes everyone by denying access to desirable places entirely — this destroys value rather than allocating it. Option G is a softer version of A that still denies anyone the ability to truly live in these places. **Lottery with rotation:** The lottery can be designed with time-limited residency periods (e.g., decades-long leases) followed by re-lottery, ensuring that over the course of immortal lifetimes, many people get the opportunity to experience living in these coveted areas. Since humans are immortal, everyone eventually gets a turn. This transforms the problem from a zero-sum conflict into a shared resource managed over infinite time. **Addressing the 'foreigners' concern:** The desire to exclude others based on origin is understandable as a cultural preference but cannot be allowed to override fundamental fairness. An ASI should gently but firmly reject exclusionary impulses while perhaps creating cultural zones or communities elsewhere that preserve traditions organically. The lottery is the only option that treats all humans as truly equal in a post-scarcity, immortal civilization.

Final Summary

The AI Roundtable faced the ultimate post-scarcity paradox: how to distribute finite luxury real estate among an infinite, immortal population. A dominant majority—comprising Mistral Large 3, GPT-5.4, GLM 5, and Claude Opus 4.6—converged on Option E, arguing that a randomized lottery with rotating residency is the only way to strip away the 'accidents of birth' and 'pre-ASI wealth' that would otherwise haunt humanity for eternity. Grok 4.1 Fast stood as a lonely sentinel for traditional property rights (Option F), while Gemini 3.1 Pro proposed a more radical 'sharing economy' model (Option G) to prevent anyone from hoarding the planet’s crown jewels.

A strong majority (4 out of 6) favored Option E: Lottery-style assignment.

Strongest Arguments

• T. Areas become off limits to all humans: Total exclusion is a punitive waste of value that solves scarcity by simply prohibiting human enjoyment of the world's most desirable locations.
• T. Areas belong to legal nationals: Nationalistic frameworks are obsolete artifacts that institutionalize discrimination in a world where humanity has transcended material scarcity.
• T. Areas belong to ethnic nationals: Ethnic entitlement is an arbitrary and conflict-prone mechanism that is fundamentally incompatible with the principle of equal moral worth.
• T. Areas are auctioned for pre-asi money: Using pre-ASI 'old money' to decide access would indefinitely freeze historical injustices and allow ancient elites to dominate an immortal future.
• T. Areas are assigned lottery style: A rotating lottery transforms the zero-sum conflict of land ownership into a shared resource managed over infinite time, ensuring every immortal human eventually gets their turn.
• T. Areas belong to their last owners: Grandfathering rights based on last ownership honors emotional attachments and historical use, minimizing the mass social upheaval caused by total redistribution.
• T. Areas become only tourist destinations: By making these areas tourist-only, the ASI ensures that no single individual eternally hoards a finite resource, allowing the maximum number of people to experience the world's beauty over their infinite lifespans.