>>60146809
Species splits into the Eloi and Morlocks.

>>60146946
But the Eloi and Morlocks live symbiotically, they need one another. Owners wouldn't need the unemployed, they have machine workers instead.

>>60146809
star trek-esque

people work because they want to, not because they have to
all basic needs are met, allowing people to advance to the next step of maslowes heirarchy of needs as an entire species
without wasting time or energy on not dying or pulling rocks out of the earth, people are free to be philosophers, football players, or space explorers at will
if you want to do nothing, thats also fine, you can live a life of pure hedonism since magical matter replicators allow society to sustain your lifestyle for pennies, and can synthesize any panacea for your ruined liver
speaking of pennies, the only things of any value would be stuff like artwork, historical artifacts, or front row seats to a concert, stuff with value that cant be pinned to the dollar
the dollar itself would be useless except as paper
the only immediate problems would be outside your own civilization, like dealing with the space soviets

>>60146809
It'll either be a utopian society, or more likely it'll fall into the behavioral sink predicted by Calhoun.

>>60147008
Is that really a believable perspective? Why would the machine owners freely distribute their production among people who don't have anything worthwhile to offer in return?

I get that people who own and have access to some of the machines will have all their basic needs met so they can focus on whatever interests them, but what about the people who don't own any of the machines?

Only around half of all Americans own stocks. Unless the other half suddenly comes into some wealth and has the prescience to buy into these automated machines when they first come around, that's some 115 million people who are up shit creek without a paddle. No real means of producing anything for themselves, and nothing worthwhile to barter with.

Is there going to be enough charity to go around? How many people are just going to starve? What if they kick off? Is the post-scarcity utopia going to be built on the foundations of a massively unbalanced civil war that curbstomps the poor?

>>60147225
Starting to sound like a dirty socialist there, anon.

>>60147534
What's your solution? Broken promises, reservations, blankets soaked in cholera?
If you have 115 million people in your borders who are not necessary or even authorized to be part of the economy or body politic, you have a problem. You can either change the status of those people, change the nature of those people, or exterminate them. Only one of those paths leads away from dystopia.

>>60147623
>You can either change the status of those people, change the nature of those people
What's the difference?

>>60146809
Limitless energy implies that we would very quickly use it to kill that other guy and fuck his wife.

Can these machines produce more of themselves? If so, everyone will have them because demand will be high but supply infinite. Society shifts from producer/consumer to maintenance/consumer as you can build whatever but someone needs to keep it from breaking. Art, philosophy, and science would skyrocket. Either cities engulf the world as there is no need for farms/mines or nature takes these back and people fly between cities. With a lack of things to offer people in return for power, governments either slowly dissolve or become tyrannical.

>>60147786
They can maintain and replace themselves, but they have no innate drive to propagate themselves, and will only make more of themselves if and when they're ordered to.

>If so, everyone will have them because demand will be high but supply infinite.
And what will those who don't own any of the machines give the owners in exchange for some of their machines?

>>60147875
Simple services like cleaning, repair, sales, etc will still be of use. Hell, if one philanthropist gives one machine to someone with the drive to share, problem solved

>>60147913
>Simple services like cleaning, repair, sales, etc will still be of use.
Why? We're already on the way to automating these. I'd say we're going to have these much sooner than we'll have automated resource gatherers in space.

>>60146809
unemployed develop powerful guilt-tripping mechanisms until a rich guy gives in and hands them one self-propagating omnifabber

>>60147931
>We're already on the way to automating these

We've "been on the way to" fusion power and flying cars for 70 years now and it ain't happening. Don't use things that haven't been done as factual proof of your argument.

>>60148008
The other rich guys take a moment to think about what will happen with regards to living space if over a hundred million people get just as rich as they are, and try to nip the propagation of free omnifabbers in the bud.

>>60148044
just build space habitats lol

>>60148034
It's being done as we speak, anon. This isn't some far-off fictional technology. We currently have robots working in our factories and cleaning our homes.

>>60148052
Space habitats are never going to be as good as an established planet. So who gets to stay on earth, and who has to move to some second-rate space habitat?

>>60148117
>Space habitats are never going to be as good as an established planet.
not true
>So who gets to stay on earth, and who has to move to some second-rate space habitat?
there are plenty of people that would absolutely love to live in space, so those people

>>60147931
Unless robots can be made smart enough to know the difference between clean and not, where to clean and when, there will be room for a human element. Also, robots are shit at sales, have you ever heard a telemarketer? Worst case scenario, prostitution and violence would secure these machines

>>60148117
everyone can stay on earth, just like they do now

>>60148153
>Unless robots can be made smart enough to know the difference between clean and not, where to clean and when
they can
> Also, robots are shit at sales, have you ever heard a telemarketer
who the fuck would need to sell anything when you have infinite resources?

>>60148153
>Unless robots can be made smart enough to know the difference between clean and not, where to clean and when
We've had cameras for a while now, anon.

>Also, robots are shit at sales, have you ever heard a telemarketer?
Have you ever ordered anything online? That's literally buying something from a machine, which then sends the order to some human workers in a warehouse that are going to be replaced by machines within decades.

>>60148153
Maybe someone who isn't up-to-date on what machines can do RIGHT NOW shouldn't try to weigh in on what machines will be able to do in the future.

>>60148208
>>60148209
Fair enough, I'll concede the machines. But if we only have a couple of rich assholes with fabricators, why wouldn't they try to sell stuff to the masses? Almost no overhead, only real costs being initial investment, time to build, and time to transport.

>>60148343
Sell for what, money? They've got all the money in the world, they're the kings, man.

>>60148387
Servitude, political power, dick measuring contest between owners? King is a good choice, why does a king have vassals?

>>60148269
Where is the robot that can clean an entire living room, with all the various surfaces, tables, photostands, capable of dusting, polishing, etc as well as vacuuming and cleaning the windows, mirrors, etc?

>It doesn't exist, but if you make your room like this, a robot can sort of clean it!

No dice.

>>60148408
A King has vassals because his own power isn't powerful enough to control his 'realm' so he needs agents through which to act. These agents swear loyalty to the king in return for political favour, support of the King's authority in their own disputes and territory.

>>60148343
>But if we only have a couple of rich assholes with fabricators, why wouldn't they try to sell stuff to the masses?
Because there's nothing to be gained from it that they don't already have with regards to material wealth.

>>60148408
> King is a good choice, why does a king have vassals?
To take part of their income in material wealth in exchange for protection. Again, not something you need if you have your own fabricators and access to resources.

They wouldn't NEED other people to do anything. but they may WANT other people to do something. I could see some rich people being particular about human-sourced rather than computer-generated entertainment and art.

>>60148447
I wonder if there will ever be a robot that can move goal posts like you just did, faggot.

>>60148447
In the future, anon.

>>60146809

Two most common approaches to post-scarcity are as follows.

>Life is Great
People have no worries at all. The government/whoever makes the first universal replicator creates replicators and starts giving them out at will. Even without molecular harvesters, a replicator that can replicate matter out of energy can allow for the development of whatever technology is needed. People become whatever they want to be, whether that be a sheer hedonist or a philosopher or artist, whatever. As others have said...
> People work because they want to not because they need to.
> Only things still of value are concert tickets, artworks, historical artifacts, etc.
And to add on something from Star Trek, some resources that are too dangerous/unstable to be replicated may also still hold value, such as the Ferengi value Gold-Pressed Latinum, and the like.

Option two is not so fun.
> Be me, blue collar worker.
> Get home from work one day, watching news about some new replicator thingy.
> Holyshitgonnagetmeoneofthose.png
> Prepare to go to work the next day to start saving up to buy a replicator.
> Open door to sea FEMA agents waiting outside.
> Say I need to be taken to a camp for my protection.
> Tell me that I need to take a shower, but to move things along it's a group shower with a bunch of other guys.
> Kindagaybutwhatever.txt
> Hear the pipes start screeching after door shuts.
> Look up.
> MFW instead of sprinklers they have vent shafts on the ceiling.
> MFW I'm literally dying because nobody wants me to pollute the world.
> MFW I literally cost nothing to keep alive but people just don't care about me.

If you want to create a dystopian-utopia go for option two.

If you want to create Star Trek or whatever, choose option one.

>>60147225
because money will be worthless you only, need one government, or philanthropist who distributed some technology, and the whole owners versus the rest falls, if the resources are virtually endless even if only part of the owners decide to share his gains it would allow the rest to replicate the technology or feed from those few, material goods will devaluate really fast, what will be important would be reputation and maybe land (depending how much space exploring advance, and how much population grow stop, remember that after certain level of life quality people start having less children), and since reputation is the most important thing, and can be gained from art, entertainment or scientific discovery, you can be sure that many of the owners will be offering their sources for pennies if not free, in exchange of information of cultural tendency or new talent.

>>60148676
>you only, need one government, or philanthropist who distributed some technology, and the whole owners versus the rest falls
Why? Time would still be a factor. Fabricators wouldn't be distributed instantaneously, and existing Owners may have A Certain Opinion about having making their privileged position a lot less privileged.

>>60148488
It's not moving goal posts. If I had just vacuumed the floor and wiped a surface when I was cleaning, my mother, my house master, the NCOs, etc would have told me it wasn't clean. Cleaning is an involved, quite complex process and to do so properly requires a machine with the same capability as a human.

File: 1518654715003.jpg (141 KB, 850x850)

141 KB JPG

>>60146809
>What would it be like to live in a post-scarcity society like that?
It wouldn't be post-scarcity, so, there's that.

>>60148758
sure time will be a factor and maybe for a decade human kind will be in a really tense place, but again, you just need one black sheep, or government who acquire some technology and the system fall, the thing is people can be quite creative turning shit into resources, one guy between the owner could thing look all these poor people and think it one to use them somehow, there is no need that someone does something from the goodness of his heart, can be simply some attention whore wanting to have more followers, the second thing is that the fact that the technology can be share so everyone have access to everything but that doesn't mean that social class stop being a thing, in a society where reputation is everything people worthless will be treated with a high social estigma, if you are not talented or a least interesting, you will be some dude living in a box eating, sleeping and shitting, people in high places (at least the smart ones) will recognize that the new coin is reputation and connections, you thing social media is hell now imagine when people wont need jobs and they will be in it all day long, the shilling campaigns will be epic, together with that hopeful technology itself will keep progressing, and in a full hedonist society humans will go for experience more and more extreme, and poor people will only have access to the most basic need maybe eating a grey tasteless paste meanwhile well liked and connected people will have food that give full orgasm every bite.
I don't thing society will change the bottom of the human experience will ascend but so will be the top.

3 fabricators are created at around the same time. One in China, one in Germany, and one in the USA. The USA quickly grabs theirs and starts replicating it for the benefit of the people. It would be Star Trek kinda stuff, with a massive government ensuring people got their needs in return for loyalty. China wants to do this, but others in their system want to use it to dominate the world. Political turmoil, backstabbing, and several revolts would likely happen, and the people would suffer for it. Germany, hopefully rid of Merkel, will be an efficient bunch. They will provide needs for their people, but maintain a strong military force to resist invasions and eventually take most if not all of Europe. They will be more Starship Troopers than Star Trek. These major powers likely won't war amongst each other directly (MAD doctrine on steroids), but skirmishes between robots and desperate mercenaries probably happens. Southern hemisphere is slowly divided, being only useful for the land itself. Assuming we don't just fuck off to terraform Mars or something

>>60146809
We live in a post scarcity society already.

How is it going?

>>60148799
>>60149345
These can't both be true.

>>60146809
Jacque fresco talked quite a bit about how we might transition into a post scarcity society. A lot of his ideas were full of pie in the sky 1950s world's fair type ideals, but there were a few good ideas, specifically about designing a city intentionally, with the layout and automation designed from the get go as opposed to building upon layers of already decaying infrastructure.

Unfortunately he got latched onto by Peter joseph (I think that was the guys name) and a whole huge wave of buzzard conspiracy theorists

Fresco himself was mostly an engineer

File: it depends.jpg (34 KB, 425x340)

34 KB JPG

>>60146809
>What would it be like to live in a post-scarcity society like that? What would the transition to such a society be like?

>>60146946
>Post-scaracity society running on automation
>Morlocks
Literally pick one. If you want to make a retarded comparison to the Time Machine, you could just say "everyone is Eloi", instead of failing completely to even grasp the scenario at hand.

I mean we already have the earliest prototypes of a "fabricator" with state of the art home 3d printers we have right now. Mine can print incredibly fine details and working parts in olastic, but some of the newest ones can print metals too. They are even 3d printing houses now

Also, a few years ago at michigan state university they were developing solar panels that are clear, which can be layered and even replace windows with power generating panels, also check out the work on solar roads.

The only thing holding back unlimited energy right now is a lack of manufacturing infrastructure for it and tremendous pushback from industrial capitolists who have a great deal invested in older fuel sources

>>60149238
>The USA quickly grabs theirs and starts replicating it for the benefit of the people
>The USA
>For the benefit of the people
For the rich maybe.

File: 5f0c3e22.jpg (11 KB, 261x191)

11 KB JPG

>>60149238
Hi, /pol/
Bye, /pol/

>>60148622
Good summary. Option 2A would be like that movie where Matt Damon turns in to a cancer-powered robocop and teams up with Pablo Escobar to fight Agent Starling and Wikus. The rich steal all the resources and use their replicators to create a remote utopia, and then just leave everybody else to rot.

>>60149758
>For the rich maybe.
Nah, the previous anon is right. Some sharp tack among the ruling elite would immediately start using it to get votes and beat out the other ruling elites. The end result is probably more Tammany Hall than Bladerunner.

>>60149651
>I mean we already have the earliest prototypes of a "fabricator" with state of the art home 3d printers we have right now
a printer just uses set materials to make shapes
fabricators have to actually make and break molecular bonds

it's like comparing a million dollar university chemistry lab to tap water

>>60149522
There is no actual scarcity. There is a great deal of rent seeking.

It is possible that someday we will run out of enough real estate to accommodate everybody, but I expect a cataclysmic war or two will prevent this.

>>60146809
Automated onions is Unemployed.

>>60150047
>There is no actual scarcity.
lol
needs no further reply

>>60150029
>fabricators have to actually make and break molecular bonds
For a universal replicator, yes. But universal assemblers are a first step toward that. We're within a few years of commercial machines that can print in both metals and plastics, simultaneously on the same build. That opens up a STAGGERING number of things that can be created - probably the overwhelming majority of tools in any field or household.

>>60146809
We'd likely plug people into a utopian matrix by then. Far cheaper than making kobe steak is just telling your brain that you are eating kobe steak. Then the robots do population control as people age and die off, and they fix the ecosystem as it goes. Aka the matrix but not as batteries.

>>60150029
I mean I see what you're trying to say, but I disagree.

A better analogy would be that today's 3d printers are to fabricators what the Wright brothers first gliders were to the space shuttles of today.

Yes, we have a long way to go, but it only took us 60 years to get from paper and wood gliders to space shuttles that get people to the moon and back.

It's hard to see far into the future of technology, but I this age advances happen faster than anyone can predict. 60 years isn't such a long time given the history of people as a whole

File: 138312819536.gif (285 KB, 300x169)

285 KB GIF

>>60149238
>Germany
>maintain a strong military force

>>60147225
>Why would the machine owners freely distribute their production among people who don't have anything worthwhile to offer in return?
what the hell would they stand to lose from giving them anything?
why would the cost of giving things away be any sort of consideration, when you can replace anything you give away with absolutely no downside?
barter and money would have literally no meaning, when you can and probably will give away anything at little to no cost, hell giving away replicators is easy, just replicate the replicators

thats the point of a post-scarcity economy, money as a whole is worthless as a very concept
starvation? matter replicators provide enough food for 7 billion people easily
energy? just replicate solar panels in mass, you were probably doing this to fuel all your replicators anyways
distribution? replicate a whole fleet of spaceships

>>60150060
Name a human necessity that is scarce.

>>60150573
I think the currency and trade of a post scarcity economy will largely be creativity and opinion. It will be about who can produce the greatest creative works, and in so doing draw other creative to their cause, forming massive warring studios hell be t on creating the greatest works of art, be it sculpture, film, writing, food, whatever. The entire world will turn into giant cult of per laity type tug of wars to see who can draw the most people to their aesthetic, and we will define our personal relationships and borders by these aesthetics

All the while the robots will look on, confused and apathetic.

>>60150630
the only things of value in a post-scarcity economy would be things that the replicators cant replicate

assuming that replicators can reproduce any element, in any amount, in any combination
then the only things with any value that isnt a giant space ship would be crap like jimi hendrixes bandana
intellectual property and all that

>>60150573
>what the hell would they stand to lose from giving them anything?
Real estate. Feeding millions for free is all well and good, but those people are going to breed and end up in your backyard.

>>60150434
I mean sure conceptually, but "turning printer paste into a model of a house" is so far from "turning a pile of water, carbon, air and a bit of minerals/sulphur/etc into a steaming hot hamburger", which is what fabricators are commonly portrayed as doing, that the better comparison would be the fucking WHEEL and a space craft.

>>60150599
>Name a human necessity that is scarce.
food
clean water
shelter
medicine
food
oh yeah did i mention clean water?

t. Anon That Has Actually Left The Upper-Middle Class Suburb Where He Grew Up

>>60150729
>the better comparison would be the fucking WHEEL and a space craft
Not that anon, but agree it is that big a deal.
That said, depending on where you fall on the theory of the technological singularity, that 10,000 year leap could actually happen extremely quickly - on the order of decades or even years.

>>60146809
When the costs of producing things becomes near 0 the cost of purchasing them becomes near 0 as well. It doesn't have to be out of goodness or charity, the masses will enjoy near free products regardless.
While I am wary of the early stages of automation, late stages will be fine.

The transitional period where automation has taken most, but not all, positions and prices are still compensating will be horrendous. Vast classes of people with no purpose and no chance to pursue any job will exist, and may force regulation in order for them to merely survive.
Unlike the people who believe there is no threat, I understand that not everyone is smart enough to be a robot maintenance or engineer or whatever. We don't have any area that ISN'T under some level of threat of automation for people to retreat to this time.

No idea what you guys are talking about, but I would mass-produce free Warhammer models

>>60150573
By the time we can actually fabricate at the molecular level, I'm sure we'll be sharing shit all over the place. But getting there will take time.

There is going to be a generation where human labourers are going to be replaced by expensive assemblers that still need specific resources. In this economy that hasn't truly done away with scarcity yet, there are going to be people who can't purchase the new assembled goods because their man hours have become worthless.

The owners of the machines, on the other hand, will soon realize they don't even need these people as consumers anymore, because there's no product or service they need to buy in order to keep production running anymore. They can produce machines for anything they need.

That's the transitional phase.

>>60146809
scarcity is artificial

>>60146809
https://youtu.be/0Z760XNy4VM
There is no such thing as post-scarcity.
By the time we even come close to the quality of life in a post scarcity society, birth rates plummet and the culture surrounding social interaction completely disintegrates. If you want a human example just look at the birth rates and disruption of standard social interaction in Japan or many western countries.

At some point we have to accept that every aspect of the human individual and collective was purpose built to face and overcome constant adversity, struggle and pain. The human brain has no possibility for functioning properly without these things.

>>60151386
>It doesn't have to be out of goodness or charity, the masses will enjoy near free products regardless.
But by then, 'the masses' will consist of the descendants of the Haves. The Have-Nots will have either been put down or simply starved out of existence.

>>60151545
Lower birthrates are fine if a society needs fewer labourers to keep itself going. 'Disintegrating' social interactions are simply changing into a new status quo. You may not like change, but that's completely subjective.

>>60151513
If goods become too expensive to purchase but the resources to produce them isn't limited, prices will go down to compensate. There is no point in making things if there is no one to buy them.

This theoretical greedy capitalist who produces warehouses full of chairs while the majority of people sit on the ground because the capitalist artificially inflates his price is stupid. He's out for profit, and if no one can buy his shit, there is no profit.

Even with these replication machines, the theoretical greedy capitalist would want to recoup the initial cost of his purchase of the machine, therefore he has to produce something the masses need and can afford.

>>60151545
>he thinks mouse models are a good idea for fucking psychology
I don't have a brainlet small enough for this stupid fucking meme

File: 06VELTA.jpg (30 KB, 499x499)

30 KB JPG

>>60146809
Dude you basically described the federation and there answer is that they study and work basically for bragging rights and more 50s hollogram larp time.

And if you don't like it you can go set up your own colony and get raped by alien raiders out in unclaimed space.

>>60151642
>If goods become too expensive to purchase but the resources to produce them isn't limited, prices will go down to compensate.
In the early stages, resources will still be limited. We may be able to assemble anything with the right resources, but we still need to send out machines to actually gather those resources.

>There is no point in making things if there is no one to buy them.
You'd make things to meet your own wants and needs.

>This theoretical greedy capitalist who produces warehouses full of chairs while the majority of people sit on the ground because the capitalist artificially inflates his price is stupid.
This theoretical capitalist is a strawman. Nobody is going to just store warehouses full of chairs. You're going to make as many chairs as you need or want, then shelve or repurpose the machine that makes chairs until you need some more chairs again.

>Even with these replication machines, the theoretical greedy capitalist would want to recoup the initial cost of his purchase of the machine,
Why? As soon as he has his assemblers and resource gatherers running, the only resource he will ever need again is time. The cost of the first machines has been spent, and is now completely irrelevant.
>therefore he has to produce something the masses need and can afford.
The masses that don't own any of the automated means of production can't afford shit. They can go ahead and subsist in some archaic homesteads in the middle of nowhere. At least, until the people who do own automated means of production take an interest in their slice of nowhere for whatever reason.

>>60151997

>Why? As soon as he has his assemblers and resource gatherers running, the only resource he will ever need again is time.
Then why even make more than one? Following that logic the first person to create one is also the last, since there is no reason to sell or distribute more.

>The masses that don't own any of the automated means of production can't afford shit.
What stops them from forming a group, pooling their resources and making their own automated means of production together?
Unless the replicator sprung into existence whole, without any leadup, it will be based on understandable principles which can be done again, with our without the original creator.

It feels like you've concocted a scenario that confirms your own biases, instead of one that makes sense.

>>60146809
post-scarcity
I bloody hate this term, who controls the gathering of resources and energy, even if it is from the sun or asteroids, control the power.
If we do make replicators, they still need the raw resources to make things which is kind of shit as that literally removes the secondary portion of an economy leaving only primary (raw resources) and services.

>>60153241
>Then why even make more than one? Following that logic the first person to create one is also the last, since there is no reason to sell or distribute more.
Because there's more than one capitalist institution with an R&D department and an interest in machinery like this.

>What stops them from forming a group, pooling their resources and making their own automated means of production together?
Competition with capitalist institutions that have a fuckhuge headstart in terms of resources.

>>60153366
Then don't assume post-scarcity automatically means everything is a happy wonderland without any sort of power structures.

>>60153403

>Because there's more than one capitalist institution with an R&D department and an interest in machinery like this
And therefore more and more chances fit the technology to leak and become available to the masses to reproduce

>Competition with capitalist institutions that have a fuckhuge headstart in terms of resources.
What does a head start matter? It's an end game technology. They don't have to compete once they have it because resources are plentiful, and before they have it they aren't a threat.

>>60153639
>What does a head start matter
>they don't have to compete once they have it

They still have to compete internally, for things like social status, and one famous way to do that is to force their ideals on outsiders, underclasses, or fringes of their society. So a head start is a big deal if its a death race where the winners enforce a one world government.

>>60153926

>They still have to compete internally, for things like social status
What does that have to do with the masses acquiring this replicator technology? If it exists eventually someone else will figure out how to do it, and there goes your hegemony. There has never existed a government able to completely block information from its people.

The most developed nations destroy everyone who is not on their level, and then purge their own societies of the lower castes. Afterwards the surviving smaller population of most advanced folk start shaping the world into aesthetically pleasing paradise.

Whoever designs and maintains the replicator will join big pharma, oil cartels and electronics giants at the top of the food chain. Things will become more affordable for the average person but there won't be any radical social changes.
Also, making production radically cheaper doesn't affect the cost to transport and distribute the product, regardless of whether you're moving replicators plus raw material or finished goods.
Waiting for the first person to suggest replicating fuel or full batteries for the truck.

>>60153241
>What stops them from forming a group, pooling their resources and making their own automated means of production together?
Yeah I remember when the poor of Africa just pooled the little they had together and built a nuclear power plant.

If everyone has unlimited resources and robot hordes to play around with, how long until some mass shooter type creates a knockoff faro plague?