Tech Billionaires and Doom Prepping: Should We Be Worried?
In recent years, an intriguing trend has emerged among some of the world’s wealthiest tech entrepreneurs: investing heavily in secure properties, often with underground shelters or extensive "bunkers." This phenomenon, popularly dubbed "doom prepping," has prompted questions about whether these billionaires are preparing for a catastrophic future and what implications this might have for the rest of society.
Mark Zuckerberg’s Secretive Shelters
Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg arguably exemplifies this trend. Since as early as 2014, Zuckerberg has been developing a sprawling 1,400-acre compound known as Koolau Ranch on Hawaii’s Kauai island. The estate reportedly includes an underground shelter equipped with independent energy and food supplies, designed to operate off-grid. Workers involved in the project were bound by strict non-disclosure agreements, heightening speculation about its true purpose. A six-foot wall was constructed to shield the compound from nearby roads, intensifying privacy and mystery.
Zuckerberg has dismissed rumors that the structure is a doomsday bunker, describing it instead as a "little shelter" or "basement." However, suspicions persisted after he purchased 11 adjacent properties in the Crescent Park neighborhood of Palo Alto, California, where a sizable underground space—some 7,000 square feet—supposedly exists. Neighbors have nicknamed it a "bunker" or "billionaire’s bat cave," although official permits merely label it as basements.
Other Billionaires and Emerging "Apocalypse Insurance"
Zuckerberg is far from alone. LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman has spoken openly about the concept of “apocalypse insurance,” claiming about half of the super-rich maintain some form of fallback plan. New Zealand, with its geographic isolation and political stability, appears popular among those seeking refuge, with many wealthy individuals purchasing properties there.
The AI Factor: A New Frontier of Anxiety
Another driver of this prepping trend may be the explosive development of artificial intelligence (AI), inspiring both awe and fear. The rapid rollout and adoption of technologies like OpenAI’s ChatGPT have raised existential questions about the future of human-machine interaction and control.
Ilya Sutskever, OpenAI’s chief scientist and co-founder, reportedly proposed constructing an underground shelter for key scientists before releasing a potentially transformative AI system known as artificial general intelligence (AGI)—machines capable of matching or exceeding human cognitive abilities. While details about this plan remain sparse, it highlights a growing tension within the AI research community: the simultaneous excitement about AI’s benefits and concern about its risks.
When Will AGI Arrive?
Predictions vary widely among experts about the timeline for AGI’s arrival. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has suggested it might appear “sooner than most people think,” while DeepMind co-founder Sir Demis Hassabis believes it could arrive within five to ten years. Other researchers, like Anthropic founder Dario Amodei, forecast powerful AI emerging as soon as 2026. Skeptics caution that such timelines are speculative and depend on numerous breakthroughs yet to materialize. Professor Dame Wendy Hall of Southampton University notes that the scientific community appreciates current AI achievements but argues they remain far from genuine human-like intelligence. Professor Neil Lawrence from Cambridge University dismisses the notion of AGI as unrealistic, emphasizing the contextual nature of intelligence and technology.
Vision of a Super-Intelligent Future
Supporters of AGI and its potential successor, artificial super intelligence (ASI), envision transformative benefits such as curing diseases, solving climate issues, and producing abundance without the need for traditional jobs. Elon Musk has enthusiastically suggested that super-intelligent AI could deliver “universal high income,” with everyone having personal AI assistants akin to sci-fi droids.
Yet, concerns remain. Prominent figures warn about AI’s potential dangers—whether through weaponization by malicious actors or autonomous decisions that could harm humanity. Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the World Wide Web, recently stressed the need to retain control over AI systems, underscoring the importance of being able to “switch it off.”
Government Responses and Ethical Debates
Governments have begun addressing AI risks. In the United States, an executive order issued by President Biden in 2023 required major AI companies to share safety testing data with federal authorities, although this was partially rolled back by former President Trump. The UK government established the AI Safety Institute to study advanced AI threats and develop appropriate safeguards.
These official measures coincide with private moves by the ultra-wealthy to secure their own “apocalypse insurance” via remote properties and fortified shelters. However, some insiders voice skepticism about the sustainability and ultimate security of such plans. Notably, a former bodyguard of a billionaire described a grim scenario in which security personnel might betray their employer to secure bunker access, illustrating human unpredictability even in crisis preparation.
Should We be Alarmed?
While tech billionaires’ preparations for worst-case scenarios may attract media attention and public curiosity, perspectives differ widely on their implications:
- Some see the behavior as a rational response to genuine global risks, including geopolitical instability, climate change, and the unknown dangers posed by future AI technologies.
- Others consider it a disproportionate reaction driven by paranoia, privilege, and a desire to control outcomes that remain largely unpredictable.
Experts such as Neil Lawrence caution against overstating the likelihood of near-term AGI arrival or catastrophic AI-induced scenarios. Instead, they advise broad public engagement with AI technologies to harness benefits responsibly and ensure ethical development.
In conclusion, the “doom prepping” activities of tech billionaires reflect a mix of foresight, fear, and perhaps a sense of exclusivity in the face of uncertain technological and ecological futures. While these personal preparations may not directly signal impending disasters, they serve as a reminder of the profound challenges and ethical questions humanity faces as it enters an era increasingly shaped by advanced AI and rapid global change. Understanding these issues with clarity and balance remains crucial for policymakers, technologists, and the public alike.
