It's really something Asimov's 'Robot' series looks at in great detail, with all the benefits and problems such development brings. Earth is the equivalent of a third-world power in his storyline because the new settled worlds are robotised from the ground up and have become superior- worlds with no crime (well, no violent or property crime, anyway), no disease, and endless technological and cultural development. But also large potential problems. It is all interesting stuff.
Member> “somehow i think the human race wasn't meant to be here on earth that long”. Now, what do you mean with ”wasn’t meant”?
I wouldn’t agree that misery equals challenge. But somehow we’ve got used to accepting misery as part of our lives. Millions live in poverty, millions starve, there’s disease, pollution, poison in the air and in our food. The question is, I guess: Does this have to be so? Wouldn’t it be a bigger challenge to get rid of these things, than to make amends on a daily basis? And then finally turn to he things that matter?
Mac11586> “Make life easier?” I can agree if you mean, getting more spare time. As soon as we were able to free some people from hunting/growing food, we could have people invent written languages, write, and collect stories, and we got things like art and science.
And most of us still spend a lot of time sustaining ourselves. At least 8 hours each day at work to make money to buy necessities and luxuries. It’s still making a living. I don’t go out to hunt my own deer, but I must still work not to go hungry.
I agree that if we could get the machines to do all the hard, boring labour, we’d be going somewhere. If our basics need were met, all of us, all over the world that is.
I have never read Asimov (I must admit to my shame), but wasn’t he the guy who invented the four laws of robotics?
I think that as long as we don’t give the machines intelligence like our own it might work. Otherwise we might end up as in Renaissance I and II?