The Ultra High-Tech World

[frob2900]

This is not so much a political thread, but more a throught-experiment dealing with human nature.

What if in the future, technology will become so advanced that our basic material needs can be provided completely "for free" by automated production facilities? (e.g. orbital factories with plastics being produced using Carbon from Mars and Venus, metals mined from the Asteroid belt all powered by orbital solar panel arrays etc.).

Production would be so high and resources so abundant, that 10 billion people could easily be supported to live nice upper-middle class lives (nice car, nice flat, nice TV etc.) without people having to work (imagine that maintenance is being done on the production facilities by automated robots)..

Now, would it be acceptable/possible to keep this world in equillibrium? Uncontrolled population growth would wreck the universal well-being, so that would obviously be a problem, but what of all our old ideas such as capitalism/socialism etc.? Would they fit in? Forgetting about economics, what about human nature itself?

Is human nature such that many people get sad and restless unless they can be fighting for a better position monetarily or on the social ladder? Would people see an acceptably good universal standard as a bad thing, simply because they can't really pull any advantage over their peers? Would selfishness ruin the system?

(Yes, I understand that this wonderful great production system would have been built by a nation with some kind of economic system, but this is a thought experiment so we can examine the situation purely on it's merits rather than it's history)

 

[warpus]

Sounds like you're describing the communist-like world of Star Trek.

 

[Chieftess]

People still need to maintain the robots, unless they self-repair themselves. Even then, you'll need people to control the flow of production, task robots to scout new materials, etc.. So, not everyone will be laying around doing nothing, and everything would be free. Workers would still demand money.

 

[frob2900]

Sounds like you're describing the communist-like world of Star Trek.

It's socialist in the sense that everybody has equal minimum material comforts, but I haven't really said that the state is actively pressuring people to stay equal or curbing free market competition. It is more a thought experiment on how the relevance of economic systems would change if the minimum level of comfort was automatic and didn't cost other people significant anything in taxes etc. (I could equally well have chosen magic as the cause of this, but I thought technology was more sensible).

People still need to maintain the robots, unless they self-repair themselves. Even then, you'll need people to control the flow of production, task robots to scout new materials, etc.. So, not everyone will be laying around doing nothing, and everything would be free. Workers would still demand money.

Yep. This is very true. However I think a basic assumption is that the robots can maintenance themselves adequately. The scouting of new materials would be important only in a few centuries, because the solar system has ample raw material to support 10 billion people for a long time. (Of course, if one wishes, one could assume that there is some method to travel to nearby solar systems to get raw materials.. but that is a bit more scientifically iffy/controversial than automated production).

But anyway, the basic assumption is that the core technocracy necessary to keep the automation system functional is very small compared to the total number of people. So employment on the order of only 1-2% would be necessary to keep things going as they are. Of course, any kind of development would require more human intervention, either through Free Market competitive development or state-mandated research projects.

 

[dh_epic]

Sounds like you're describing the communist-like world of Star Trek.

That's immediately what I thought of. You would essentially create a "working elite". The vast majority would not work, with jobs reserved for minimal purposes: government, security, research, and maintenance of existing technology. Only the best and brightest would be able to take these few jobs.

Overpopulation seems like a legitimate concern. The major way that population is controlled is actually through economics: when women take more part in the workforce, they are more likely to use contraceptives and delay/minimize their pregnancies. But then, if material needs can be taken care of, then what does population matter?

 

[LightFang]

People will always strive to get better and so they might muck the order up. You're forgetting that once everybody reaches that sort of level, the new "bottom" gets boosted dramatically.

 

[drachasor]

I don't think this will happen before humanity and machines merge into a new kind of life. So the world is going to be a dramatically different place.

Certainly in such a world human nature would be different (even genetics will give us the ability to change human nature of society wishes).

IMHO, it would probably end up more Star Trek-like than not.

-Drachasor

 

[frob2900]

I get the impression that something being Star Trek-like makes it kind of sad (irrespective of other advantages)

(I tend to share this sentiment too )

Perhaps it's the fear of those horrible jumpsuit things everyone wears in S.T...

 

[drachasor]

I meant in philosophy. Things would be more about the betterment of mankind, pursuit of knowledge, etc, (and general happiness) than anything else.

 

[C~G]

The Ultra Technocracy world?

Well, I think the most problems with that are people coming too attached to machines and deattached to organic lifeforms. Of course some people like in this forum might not see that as bad thing...I guess then we can have the fashionable and inevitable "female android advice"-threads too.

The most problems would be tied to feeling of uselessness as machines would handle most of the stuff. The result is long leisure time without anything to do but toy with machines. I think the profoundness feeling of experiencing life would be severively hampered. Even nowadays you see that same in some people who live in their own artificial social reality but it would be much worse then.

It would be probably one endless cocktail-party or stream of cocktail-parties where you just shift from one place to another to discuss about some new niche thing that people don't care about in other ways but how it happens to reflect their own persona towards the social ring they are part of.

Iain M. Banks in his Culture-series talks about civilization similar to this...

 

[The Yankee]

Might as well put this in here before someone else does. Trust me, I actually have a point in doing so!

Spoiler :

See, in this ultra technological world, with the ability to make nearly or all of everything everyone needed so easily, resources would be consumed at a fantastic pace. Thus, the need to discover and exploit new resources will always be a problem. Sure, we may be able to automate the mining and manufacturing processes in such a world (or worlds). But it'd be a lot harder to automate the discoveries.

Even if you could have machines explore and dig, there will always have to be someone to oversee the process somewhere along the line. And it would be inefficient to have such a person in Earth all the time, especially given the times needed to communicate. Thus, people would have to go abroad (in the galactic sense). Even in the Star Trek example, colonies sprang up and people had to rough it for a time.

If anything ever happened somewhere along this line, it looks like the whole line collapses, if briefly. As a result, you may just go back to life as it was in the picture since most people wouldn't retain the knowledge needed to carve out a living without this dependence.

Perhaps this is more proof that ultra anything isn't necessarily a good idea.

 

[sourboy]

That much free time would be vast laziness, too much procreation, competition for leisure locales, or just idle hands at work... problems will remain. Jobs will still be required, and c'mon machines? 1 EMP of minor proportion made by a bored teen by free materials, would be like today's version of graffiti via spray cans.

Nice to think outside of the box, but all things considered, it won't play out like you suggest here.... (and if materials were free, I'd be working on a lightsaber -- screw star trek!)

 

[GoodEnoughForMe]

Production would be so high and resources so abundant, that 10 billion people could easily be supported to live nice upper-middle class lives (nice car, nice flat, nice TV etc.) without people having to work[/SIZE].

This would no longer be considered upper class though. Upper class would then be having an army of robots or something. Ok, not really, but I think you see the point, 'upper class, high end items' are constantly being redefined.

 

[Murky]

Sounds like you're describing the communist-like world of Star Trek.

Star Trek wasn't communist. It was human civilization approaching a zenith of technological innovation and equality. Just because they managed to rid society of greed and poverty doesn't make them communist.

 

[frob2900]

The most problems would be tied to feeling of uselessness as machines would handle most of the stuff. The result is long leisure time without anything to do but toy with machines. I think the profoundness feeling of experiencing life would be severively hampered. Even nowadays you see that same in some people who live in their own artificial social reality but it would be much worse then.

This makes no sense. There would still be culture in all it's forms: art, music, theater, movies etc. There would also be hobbies (you know: stamp collecting, fishing, whatever...). Where did you read "only toying with machines into this???"

It would be probably one endless cocktail-party or stream of cocktail-parties where you just shift from one place to another to discuss about some new niche thing that people don't care about in other ways but how it happens to reflect their own persona towards the social ring they are part of.

Is that what you see spare time as?

Nice to think outside of the box, but all things considered, it won't play out like you suggest here.... (and if materials were free, I'd be working on a lightsaber -- screw star trek!)

I never suggested it would play out in any way. It's an abstract thought experiment about the human drive to work and compete.

This would no longer be considered upper class though. Upper class would then be having an army of robots or something. Ok, not really, but I think you see the point, 'upper class, high end items' are constantly being redefined.

Army of fifty foot tall robots, you mean

 

[C~G]

This makes no sense. There would still be culture in all it's forms: art, music, theater, movies etc. There would also be hobbies (you know: stamp collecting, fishing, whatever...). Where did you read "only toying with machines into this???"

Sure, stamps would be known as "antique".

How many people nowadays living in urban city go fishing?

And who said there would be much fish left anyhow?

Well, those arts you mentioned would be of course be done by machines, wouldn't they?
Everybody could be an artist as machines would make it so easy, maybe even AI machines themselves.

Also I see that virtual reality would become probably more interesting than the reality we live in.

Is that what you see spare time as?

Nope, but that would people create when they have too much free time.

There would be probably some sort of social status and hierarchy anyhow based into something artificial.

frob2900, I have to ask this from you, is this your dream?

 

[frob2900]

How many people nowadays living in urban city go fishing?

I know a few.

Well, those arts you mentioned would be of course be done by machines, wouldn't they?
Everybody could be an artist as machines would make it so easy, maybe even AI machines themselves.

Erm. Art and industrial manufacturing/mining are two very separate things. I have a hard time thinking machines would replace "human made art". Even things such as fractals (which are purely mathematical, generated on a computer) require human feedback in the form of chosen colors etc. You know, aesthetics...

Also I see that virtual reality would become probably more interesting than the reality we live in.

But you still interact with humans in virtual reality, don't you? I mean, come on, you cant argue that machines will replace human contact? (If so, then you are missing the point)

Nope, but that would people create when they have too much free time.

Ok. Interesting. So you are saying human beings cannot handle too much free time?

frob2900, I have to ask this from you, is this your dream?

Uh? No.

[EDIT] I find it fascinating that you would ask that. What was the train of thought which lead to the question?

 

[C~G]

I know a few.

Sure.
There are always "a few". We're talking about major lines here, aren't we?

Erm. Art and industrial manufacturing/mining are two very separate things. I have a hard time thinking machines would replace "human made art". Even things such as fractals (which are purely mathematical, generated on a computer) require human feedback in the form of chosen colors etc. You know, aesthetics...

So you aren't talking about "Ultra high tech"-world but "high tech"- world?

It's your thought experiment of course, I just layed out one possible scenario rising from this thought of "ultra high tech".

But you still interact with humans in virtual reality, don't you? I mean, come on, you cant argue that machines will replace human contact? (If so, then you are missing the point)

Well, I guess I'm the one missing the point then.

People will start to treat other people similar to that of machines as they become more intelligent and the machines will have great effect towards how we see relationship with being similar to ourselves, other humans.

Ok. Interesting. So you are saying human beings cannot handle too much free time?

Who says they can't handle it?

I just said how they handle it.

Of course there would be all kinds of games etc. where people could participate (probably in virtual reality) which would have competing factors.

Uh? No.

Just asking, since you seem to defend this idea of having any effect to humans at all (possibly negative).

Neither you apparently have no idea how much this would effect how people feel about their lifes. People would change pretty much after few generations of getting only machines to produce everything for them. The natural living cycle would be broken. Everything could be called to be artificial.

But now I think I leave this thought experiment and cocktail party for those that "don't miss the point".

 

[drachasor]

Erm. Art and industrial manufacturing/mining are two very separate things. I have a hard time thinking machines would replace "human made art". Even things such as fractals (which are purely mathematical, generated on a computer) require human feedback in the form of chosen colors etc. You know, aesthetics...

Humans are just biological machines, and eventually we'll be able to make machines that exceed our capabilities* (due to being larger and without some of our evolutionary baggage). That can be any sort of capability, including art.

IMHO, the only way humans will be able to stay competitive is to stop being entirely human (e.g. cyborgs and such). That or artificially restrain our technological advancement (which never works for long in practice).

-Drachasor

*At our current rate of advancement, we'll have computers as complex as the human brain around 2050. Actual advancement might be slower or faster, but clearly it is technically possible (we exist, after all), so it will happen eventually (unless we are wiped out).

 

[frob2900]

Sure.
So you aren't talking about "Ultra high tech"-world but "high tech"- world?

Ok? Well, I haven't really made the definition of "ultra" clear, so I suppose that was your reading.

It's your thought experiment of course, I just layed out one possible scenario rising from this thought of "ultra high tech".

Sure, that's one possibility.

People will start to treat other people similar to that of machines as they become more intelligent and the machines will have great effect towards how we see relationship with being similar to ourselves, other humans.

Is that good or bad in your opinion?

Of course there would be all kinds of games etc. where people could participate (probably in virtual reality) which would have competing factors.

Yep. People need competition. The question was whether or not the real world economic system would be affected by it.

Just asking, since you seem to defend this idea of having any effect to humans at all (possibly negative).

I'm not defending anything. I'm interested in hearing opinions on this, since I find it an interesting question

Neither you apparently have no idea how much this would effect how people feel about their lifes.

Well. That's why I'm asking.

People would change pretty much after few generations of getting only machines to produce everything for them. The natural living cycle would be broken. Everything could be called to be artificial.

What's a "natural living cycle"? Is "everything artificial" good or bad?

But now I think I leave this thought experiment and cocktail party for those that "don't miss the point".

Fair enough.

Humans are just biological machines, and eventually we'll be able to make machines that exceed our capabilities* (due to being larger and without some of our evolutionary baggage). That can be any sort of capability, including art.

Hmm. But isn't "art" pretty much defined as something we humans find aesthetic and/or thought-provoking? If machines could do something like that, wouldn't that be good?

IMHO, the only way humans will be able to stay competitive is to stop being entirely human (e.g. cyborgs and such). That or artificially restrain our technological advancement (which never works for long in practice).

I tend to agree with this.

*At our current rate of advancement, we'll have computers as complex as the human brain around 2050. Actual advancement might be slower or faster, but clearly it is technically possible (we exist, after all), so it will happen eventually (unless we are wiped out).

Yes, I've read about that. That will be interesting to see! (We'll be pretty old by then, though )