Hacker News Reader

> 1- What's the essence of private property when the working robots can already fulfill all the needs of the humanity ?

Who owns the robots? That's the trillion dollar question.

> 2- What's the essence of political power where nobody feels anymore the need to elect good policymakers because their life is already perfect ?

Kings and emperors already had lives almost as perfect as they could be and they still chose to fight wars. Robots will not magically change human nature. There will likely always be people who will want to play the modern equivalent of "game of thrones", so to speak.

The will to power and the desire for world domination.

Oh- you ask these questions before eradicating religious extremism? That new way of life is even more 'sin' for them than what we have now with all sexual and liberal revolutions.

Assuming all newborn people will be smart and logical and will never fight for their local tales is an utopia by itself.

>3- What will be the safeguard to prevent a maleficient/egoist minds to lock the access to all that abundancy ? That's quite philosophical question as humanity never experienced that kind of pure evil mindset. Every dictatorship, slavery, oppression were always driven by the context of competition towards the control over a limited economic resources.

The best safeguard against someone keeping AI for themselves would be to distribute the knowledge and equipment as widely as possible, and to build open alternatives where ones don't already exist. As the Cypherpunk FAQ tells us, the best way to secure digital rights is through technological solutions.

There is a really good short novel Manna [1] that explore two models of Post robotic world.

1. http://marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm

"Really good"? I found it amateurish in its style, questionable in its priors, and far from compelling in its conclusions, being neither enjoyable to read nor worthwhile to have read.

One man's opinion, of course, and worth only what you paid for it, but even among the already questionable field of futurism, the very kindest that can be said of this effort is that it fails to stand out.

Well, the 'good' model is quite depressing in my opinion.

SPOILER ALERT!!!!!

In the end, the protagonist chooses to be just waisting lots of resources just doing something of no value when he could choose to join the people that make all the advances and, with this choice, generating the conditions for more people to not live caged.

> protagonist chooses to be just wasting lots of resources just doing something of no value

In your opinion. Obviously they find it a good value for their resources.

Study history for interesting human actions. Some strive to improve the human condition, most go through life with no wake, and some, are evil and proceed to actively inhibit the human condition.

I meant no value for anyone else. For instance, they could use these resources to support more people that was jailed in the complex he came from. Or to advance the state of the art of science and technology. But he choose to waste lots of resources like light and materials just for himself.