TECH

The tech elite is investing in luxury bunkers, like the statue of the great megalomaniac of Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar II

Silicon Valley billionaires are building luxurious underground havens in remote locations to protect themselves from potential catastrophes — from runaway AI to social and climate collapses. The trend, which involves names like Mark Zuckerberg and Peter Thiel, exposes the chasm between private security and public trust in institutions.

Technological paranoia has taken concrete — and underground — form. In recent years, big names in the digital industry have been buying isolated land and building self-sufficient bunkers. The reason: the fear of out-of-control artificial intelligence, social collapse, or climate chaos. The phenomenon, revealed by outlets like Wired and The New Yorker, combines existential anxiety, strategic investment, and inequality on a planetary scale.

The main motivation behind this rush to the havens is the fear of AI-generalization (AGI) — a form of artificial intelligence capable of surpassing human reasoning. Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, told The New Yorker that he is preparing for "global eventualities" by maintaining stockpiles of weapons, gold, and remote properties.

Ilya Sutskever, former scientific director of OpenAI, even proposed that the company build an underground shelter for its top scientists before presenting an AGI to the world, according to journalist Karen Hao in Empire of AI.

Despite the alarmism, academic experts remind us that superintelligence is still a long way off. Researchers interviewed by The Economic Times say that enormous technical barriers persist. Even so, the apocalyptic discourse has become a marketing and investment-grabbing tool in the sector.

The elite's retreats follow a pattern: isolation, self-sufficiency, and luxury. According to Wired, Mark Zuckerberg has been building a 565-hectare complex in Kauai, Hawaii, called Koolau Ranch since 2014. The site includes a 465 m² underground shelter, its own energy and food production systems, and a wall almost two meters high.

The billionaire also owns a 650 m² bunker in Palo Alto, nicknamed "the multimillionaire's cave," designed to withstand local crises such as blackouts or urban unrest. Zuckerberg denies that it is an "apocalyptic bunker" and describes it as "just a basement."

Peter Thiel, founder of Palantir, obtained New Zealand citizenship and bought vast properties in the country, which has become a preferred destination for digital magnates. Reid Hoffman, co-founder of LinkedIn, popularized the term "apocalyptic insurance" and estimates that half of the ultra-rich in Silicon Valley already have shelters prepared for the worst.

"Apocalyptic insurance": a new survival economy...For Hoffman, buying a bunker is like diversifying an investment portfolio. In the event of financial collapse, these properties would maintain a "survival value." The company SAFE (Strategically Armored & Fortified Environments) claims that there are luxury shelters designed for hundreds of people, costing up to 20 million euros each, with gourmet kitchens, cinemas, and even private Formula 1 circuits.

This technocratic vision is close to transhumanism, a movement that seeks to overcome human limitations through technology and absolute control of the environment. In Empire of AI, Hao describes bunkers as "the ultimate form of autonomy — a symbol of power over one's own destiny."

The inequality beneath the surface...The boom in fortified shelters reflects an increasingly unequal world. According to SAFE, the wealth of the global elite grew by two trillion euros in 2024, while security became a restricted luxury. These shelters function as modern moats to protect capital, allowing the impacts of global crises to fall unevenly on rich and poor.

At the same time, the secrecy surrounding the constructions — and public denials, such as those from Zuckerberg — fuel social distrust. For many, billionaires seem to know something that the rest of the world ignores.

The bunker fallacy...Experts quoted by The New Yorker warn of what they call the "bunker fallacy": the idea that it is possible to survive a civilizational collapse alone. In extreme situations, they say, cooperation and community networks are more effective than individual escape.

The proliferation of private shelters, they say, diverts attention from the real challenges — such as regulating AI, combating the climate crisis, and strengthening public institutions.

While those who profit most from technological advancement hide in fortresses, the ethical question grows: will the future be built together or protected by underground walls?

mundophone