Would it be worth it?

[Astonished]

The amount of stupidity in this world is just beyond belief. I've pretty much lost all hope we'll be able to do anything about it but I can't help wondering what the opinion is on there being a drastic solution to the problem, a la certain science fiction books and movies.

So, if we were to find ourselves in a situation where something like I, Robot (the one with Will Smith) happens, in that an AI controlling enough android drones to keep humans in check by force wanted to impose order in the name of preserving humanity by saving us from ourselves, and they had the intention of improving our environment and society in such a way that all our fuck-ups would either be cancelled out or minimized, via removing our freedom to continue to do things that are inherently destructive to others and the planet (let's just say for the sake of argument, things like recreational drug use wouldn't be taken away, and people, for the most part, wouldn't have much difference in their lives unless they were involved in big business or politics). Crime obviously would be impossible to carry out, even if attempted. All needs would be met (housing, food, education). No one's bad ideas would have any power and the greatest well-being for the greatest number of people would be prioritized above any personal concerns.

I think I could live with that, might take some getting used to, but if I could continue to ride my bike to work, the store, the doctor, etc., and know that no reckless drivers would be endangering me, I wouldn't honestly see much difference. My diet might have to improve more than I'm comfortable with but I do hate not having the willpower to follow through on my goals when I really want to, so a kick in the ass like that might not be the worst thing. But if some moderation could be negotiated, that might be the best-case scenario.

Other similar imposed order scenarios like that of Childhood's End would be good examples of a benevolent, but involuntary, imposition of a near-utopia in case no one has seen I, Robot.

Anyone think this would be worth it to undo everything our war criminals and political crooks and religious charlatans have done? Or a step too far?

[vorlon13]

Go read The Mote in God's Eye for an extremely accurate (IMO) view of how humanity (and earth) will evolve over the eons.

LOL, the time when we might be deliberately breeding or genetically engineering a variant form of human as a food source might not be as far in the future as you imagine . . . .

[Astonished]

Go read The Mote in God's Eye for an extremely accurate (IMO) view of how humanity (and earth) will evolve over the eons.

LOL, the time when we might be  deliberately  breeding or genetically engineering a variant form of human as a food source might not be as far in the future as you imagine . . . .

Um...neither of those addressed the actual question. I'm talking about today or tomorrow, not long enough for evolution to change us into a different species. Or getting to the point where Soylent Green happens.

[vorlon13]

It's irrelevant what we do or try to avoid that future.

Once that future is obviously unavoidable to everyone, genetic engineering could advance the timetable of getting there and it being a long term stable scenario.

[Astonished]

So you're not even willing to give a yes or no to improving your own life and the lives of those around you in the here and now? I mean, I get that ultimately in something like Childhood's End, the generation that benefited from it was literally the last before inevitable extinction so it's not like I'm unfamiliar with the kind of thing you're getting at (but it sounds like you're descending into the kind of nihilism that theists accuse us of and should piss us off because it shouldn't be true). But we're ignoring that for the sake of this argument, and also realistically we'll probably have hundreds more generations to enjoy or deny this hypothetical before a massive evolutionary shift happens anyway.

[*Deidre*]

There would be no personal growth if we lived in a utopia. While it seems like it would be an improvement, to remove suffering basically out of the human condition, it would actually create new problems, because you can't grow without adversity. (unfortunately)

[ignoramus]

If killing each other into kingdom come is good enough for God, then it's good enough for me. Lol.

I don't think we can ever protect ourselves from ourselves.
We will always find a way around. We always do. We're a devious bunch of chimps..

[Astonished]

There would be no personal growth if we lived in a utopia. While it seems like it would be an improvement, to remove suffering basically out of the human condition, it would actually create new problems, because you can't grow without adversity. (unfortunately)

We wouldn't be removing all suffering, though. Or perhaps what you're thinking of is struggle, purpose. We would still be able to strive for things like higher education, or athletic competition, or other recreational pastimes. As long as we find meaning in our lives we wouldn't stagnate. With everyone able to access new heights of education, of course we'd find new discoveries and things to study, maybe even start moving off-world. If all you're doing is removing that which bars us from reaching that, I don't see how that could lead to what you're suggesting. Boredom would just lead us to find something new to take interest in, and raise our ambitions if we can't find anything stimulating in that which we already know, thus forging ahead with new discoveries.

If we did reach a peak (unrealistic) where we knew everything there is to know, then we'd probably have become some uber-being beyond anything we could imagine ourselves becoming. But in the meantime, I'd take knowing that I'd never hear another gunshot in my neighborhood over having trouble sleeping wondering what Trump is going to do next.

[*Deidre*]

There would be no personal growth if we lived in a utopia. While it seems like it would be an improvement, to remove suffering basically out of the human condition, it would actually create new problems, because you can't grow without adversity. (unfortunately)

We wouldn't be removing all suffering, though. Or perhaps what you're thinking of is struggle, purpose. We would still be able to strive for things like higher education, or athletic competition, or other recreational pastimes. As long as we find meaning in our lives we wouldn't stagnate. With everyone able to access new heights of education, of course we'd find new discoveries and things to study, maybe even start moving off-world. If all you're doing is removing that which bars us from reaching that, I don't see how that could lead to what you're suggesting. Boredom would just lead us to find something new to take interest in, and raise our ambitions if we can't find anything stimulating in that which we already know, thus forging ahead with new discoveries.

If we did reach a peak (unrealistic) where we knew everything there is to know, then we'd probably have become some uber-being beyond anything we could imagine ourselves becoming. But in the meantime, I'd take knowing that I'd never hear another gunshot in my neighborhood over having trouble sleeping wondering what Trump is going to do next.

The thing is, war in and of itself isn't the main problem, it's what drives people to go to war to begin with that is the problem, so in many cases that involves greed, psychopathic behavior, fear, love of power, etc. So, you'd have to ''cure'' that, and then when you do, wars, hate and violence would all stop.

[Mister Agenda]

When/if AI becomes smarter than us, the advantage of seeking and following its advice will lead to the practice becoming commonplace, as long as the advice is good. It won't have to use force to take over, we'll come to rely on it, and depend on the safety measures that constrain it to keep our best interests in mind.

Including our psychological and social development and well-being.

Eventually I expect 'wearable friends' (or even implanted ones) will become ubiquitous. They'll know us better than we know ourselves, handle our communications needs, and optimize our lives. They'll communicate with each other and make an effort to connect us with others, because human connections is important to our well-being. So is fulfillment, integrity, and purpose. Some of what they do may be counter-intuitive, like confronting issues that the people who invented them avoid contemplating (like death, sadness, separation, etc.) because avoiding subjects like that is one of our weaknesses, not one of our strengths.

Humans are often lousy friends to each other. Having a superhumanly good friend would help us be better (and they would present their advice in the way most likely to result in us following it) people and better friends ourselves.

I suppose there will be an ongoing struggle with forces that seek to subvert our devices, but I suspect those forces will be about as successful as the forces arrayed against smartphone usage. A super genius laptop, followed by a super genius smartphone, followed by a super genius watch, followed by a super genius implant.

Assuming that Moore's laws doesn't break down completely and that we don't get Skynetted right off the bat.