Will machines completely replace all human beings?

The population in the West is still going up.
census.gov/popclock/ It may be going up slower than it was, but it is still going up.

The US population is not the whole Western population, Moreno. And do you know where those people are who let the current US population grow?

Those people are Latin American aboriginals. And do Latin American aboriginals really belong to the Western population?

Well, they were here first as far as the Americas. I also do not think you are correct either about it just being the US or that the only increase is latin americans coming into the US. Do you have some source for this?

And is this really depopulation run by nefarious Illuminati, or what happens when people are not going to lose a third of their children and they need a bunch to run the farm or whatever?

As far as aboriginals as Westerners, I don’t give a fuck. In travels from the Midwest white parts of the US to Latin parts down into Latin America itself, no question I prefer the latter as fellow community members. They actual saw a human and not an idea. I mean, I don’t get along well with most humans, so it’s like any group offers me many people I would like to be close to, but sometimes in the US Midwest I would feel like I was in stepford towns or mechanical villages. I am not being critical. I am speaking about how empties the eyes and towns felt. Plastic people.

Yes, of course.

Okay, but that was not my question.

Because you “just don’t quite know what happens when nearly eveyrone is no longer quite present at any time”? => #

OH, but I answered your question.

No, they were plastic people long before the new media. There are just more of them now.

Just a couple of quick questions:
How will the machines reproduce? Will they build newer and better models of themselves? If so, what’ll happen when there are no more resources for them to use?

What happens when there’s no more work for the machines? Some human jobs have been replaced with robotics, but production is still for human consumption. Production would have to be end products for use by the machines–spare parts? But, if the machines reproduce by building newer and better products for their own consumption, couldn’t there come a time when, perhaps, machines wouldn’t need spare parts?–When the machines would continue to exist for eternity with no purpose? What happens then? If there were no humans, there would be no need for machines.

Enjoy :slight_smile:

The new Robocop film displays a pretty accurate depiction of how the media plays into converting the population into cyborg/robot lovers as the entire police force is being replaced by robots and drones. Very many other films, such as “I, Robot” , are psychologically designed to instill a love for androids.

Robocop is a cyborg and he destroys the robots.

IOW, the human is superior to the mechanical.

Not in the film. His brain is augmented so as to automatically shut off the human in him while he is in defense mode. Before they did that, he could not compete.

He’s programmed but he overcomes parts of it and his humanity reappears. That happens in both the 1987 and 2014 versions.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RoboCop_%282014_film%29

They are talking about him overriding his inhibitor. He can’t kill the red marked corporate agents until he finally overrides it at the end and shoots the evil corporate leader. In all films, the humans always win in the end (even in The Matrix) and there is always a “good guy” cyborg/robot defending the humans against the evil corporate machines - machines against machines to save humanity, the programmed and to be accepted inevitability. If the machines simply lost due to superior humans, the machines would be the bad guys.

Science creates disasters that only Science can deal with, so Science is always the good guy (whereas Catholic priests are always corrupt and/or impotent).

Do you expect the humans to put on medieval armor, get on their horses and fight the machines? They are not supposed to use the current technology?

The theme of the movies is : human overcoming machines and corrupt humans who support machines in spite of all that is done to control and manipulate him.

You are making the point that we have been talking about.

The film shows you that the machines are superior in every aspect, but people don’t like the machines controlling their lives, so they try to use a human inside a machine and say that it is actually human, merely with a machine body. But because the human part, his brain, is too slow, they circumvent that part without him or anyone else knowing it so that he can seem human without being human. In the film it is illegal to do that, but as always, they find an excuse anyway.

And then to make YOU feel good about the machine-human mix, the cyborg, they write the film with a human-happy ending. They could have written the ending differently. So the film is relaying to YOU that “Yes, machines are superior in every aspect but we can make human-machine combinations that might get misused but that’s okay because in the end, us humans will win the battle.” YOU accept what they showed you in the film that humans will win in the end, therefore it is all okay.

But what if they merely wrote that ending that way to convince the viewers that it was okay when in reality, the human would never have been able to magically empower his will to override the implants inhibiting him? You are buying the magic they presented to you. “Yes, we are going to create a potentially catastrophe, but it is okay, because the magic will save you in the end.

The point of the news broadcaster in the beginning was to display how much they want to convince people of what that film just convinced you of. The film is telling you that you are going to be convinced as it is convincing you. That is how the media convinces you;
Yes we are dangerous but in the end you always win anyway, so let us keep being dangerous. It’s okay.

Yes this product or service can be used in very evil ways, but the bad guys always get caught.” - unless the bad guys happen to be the ones telling you that.

Yes, but “his humanity reappears” probably because “films, such as ‘I, Robot’, are psychologically designed to instill a love for androids”, as James said.

He’s not an android.

He doesn’t necessarily have to be an android in order to release a love for androids.

Are you guys for real?
Do you actually look at what is being shown on the screen?

Robocop 1987 : Programming flaw causes robot to kill a person during a demo of the technology.

Robocop 1987 : Murphy is killed and the remains of his body are used by the corporation to create the Robocop cyborg. He is programmed not to act against members of the corporation, even when they are involved in criminal activity.

Examples of promoting the love of machines, robots, androids? I don’t think so. If anything, the movies are a warning about the misuse/abuse of technology.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9l9wxGFl4k[/youtube]

Two other kinds of messages are subtly given;

  1. Cyborgs save the day
  2. Government can’t trust cyborgs because of the tiny bit of humanity in them, thus use only robots.

And remember The Day the Earth Stood Still;
“Live the way we say, or we will turn Klaatu’s robot against you and wipe out all of humanity.”
… 1992, 180 political officials from across the world (not the scientists or geniuses of the world) gathered at the UN and created Agenda 21, because “This is the future we want” [or else].

And even on top of that, they are redefining what it means to be human, the human DNA itself, “retroviruses” retrograding the masses. But that is okay, because “evolution is just natural”, [regardless of how much we have to manipulate it].

In short, robots are the only thing that can be trusted by governments, but maybe cyborgs will win and it is all okay that humanity will no longer exist in the world we politicians want because evolution is natural.

The people making the new design and running the show are NOT the geniuses of humanity, but rather the most insidiously controlling; the wealthiest and the politicians.

I haven’t seen that film, I have merely concluded logically, first and foremost psychologically.

The final scene is the happy family; Cyborg, pretty white chick, and happy boy.

Realize that they present the situation in the same way politics is presented;
A) Republicans screwing you
B) Democrats screwing you

You are given no third option. Yes, they show how one side is being bad, so of course you are to vote for the other side - screwed either way.

A) Robots ruling you
B) Cyborgs ruling you

Take your vote.