Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Actually it changes it completely, as you were trying to suggest that …“and they can’t figure out that a condom is cheaper than another mouth to feed”.
They know full well what a condom can do, but they have children nonetheless for the reasons I said above; reasons well known to those that study the problem.
The way to reduce the rate of fertility is to make poor people richer.
I do not expect you to accept that, but if you follow the links I gave above you will have greater persons that myself to argue with.

The population is thought to stop rising at 10 billion and be steady by before the end of the century as third world countries coming out of dirt poverty are reducing their fertility rate to 2 per family.

You do not have to take my word for it. Take a look at the links

gapminder.org

Economical reasons are not the only reasons for having children. If the currently white population don’t know much about that fact, then that is one proof more for their decadence. They always measure anything and everything with money.

Do you really not know anybody who has children because of other reasons than economical ones?

If that is the case, then I ask you: Why do you live? And: For what? For money like (1.) communists and (2.) capitalists?

Having just requested civility, these earn a warning.

So the fertility of the white population shows - without any doubt - they are (1.) culturally decadent, (2.) economically under terror of consumption and debt, thus: bankrupt, insolvent, (3.) techn(olog)ically endangered because of the replacement by machines.

Lev, be careful you don’t say anything offensive even in the rated -G format here on the ILP forum.

Everybody here is a delicate snowflower that blows over rather easily even with the slightest jest or confrontation.

If you have to I suggest submitting your posts to the moderators first for approval before posting. It’s always best that the authority leadership here screens everybody’s posts before being posted in the threads themselves.

You might hurt somebody’s feelings and it’s rather expensive for ILP to stockpile on Kleenox tissues for everybody. They’re watching you!

They’re checking the list twice to make sure whether you’ve been naughty or nice!

I’ve already talked to the owner about putting safety cushioning on all the threads, wrapping everything in bubble wrap, and about mailing everybody safety helmets for when surfing on the net here at ILP.

It’s all about creating a safe, fun, and rated-G environment here on ILP. Think of the children for god’s sake!

This thread in all seriousness started so well. Now i have a twist on the intent and outcome. I ask Arminus to post a 4th table with breakdowns, before the quality of the forum goes into self destruct.

One thing though, if mankind can resemble analogous silly derivatives , and if this forum may be supposed to be representative of mankind’s overall thinking about the role mechanization will play in the future,(after all this is a philosophy forum), then surely Sal type machines can not be afforded the role of taking over man’s job of cognitive assignment, since it will shift immediately into dissonance, disarray, with Sal taking over and making humans into subservient slaves. Sal would think, these silly creatures are delusional in thinking they can run any kind of show here, they are fooling themselves. Therefore, very, very smart machines, should not be designed to trump man, man would surely become another endangered species. End of story. I am staying the course, in the indeterminate, column #3. Thank You.

I certainly hope so. I’d worship a machine that worked on taking out humanity; it’d be more worthy of praise than any God than created life.

All I know is that whatever happens I look forward to the day when the establishment collapses completely and seeing once kings become the new vagabonds.

If there is anything I enjoy it is seeing the once mighty being brought down low underfoot.

I like watching people from high places fall.

Those who are currently the youngest generation will probably experience it. Maybe it will come about earlier or later, but - with the utmost probability - it will come.

Thank you very much, Obe, especially for you warning because it is a real warning. It is important because we don’t want the quality of the forum to go into self destruct, do we?

Hello, new one!

Please give your answer to the question of the topic of this thread: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

[list][list][list][list][list][list][list]size=120 YES, (B) NO, (C) ABSTENTION.[/size][/list:u][/list:u][/list:u][/list:u][/list:u][/list:u][/list:u]
I will have to compile the 4th interim or even last (cp. Obe’s warning) balance sheet soon.

For comarison:
1st balance sheet,
2nd balance sheet,
3rd balance sheet.

How much percent of the gross national product ends up as income after taxes and social transfers?

|__ Examples | Finland | Germany |__ USA _| Brazil | World __|
|
Richest 20% | about 35% | about 40% _| about 47% | about 65% _| about 85% |
|
Rest (80%) _| about 65% | about 60% _| about 53% | about 35% _| about 15% _|

The trend is the “Brazilization of the World”, and the machines contribute much.

And when the “Brazilization of the World” will be reached, the next trend will be 80/20 (80% to the richest 20% and 20% to the rest, thus 80%).

Guess what the goal is.

And the machines contribute much.

A plus for the ‘a’ column, of yesses. According to a prestigious British Journal of armaments, every country in the world will possess ARMED drones, within 10 years. They want them, because it can do the same job as an aircraft carrier based fighter jet can without the cost and the expandability of the fighter pilot. A good bet is that a very expensive anti-drone technology is in the works.

40% of the aircraft involved in USA Middle East conflicts are drones.

Yes - unfortunately or fortunately.

Every country? Every?

Tendency: 100% of the aircraft purely mechanical.

This tendency will eventually make most armies obsolete.

Yep. or maybe 99%, why not?
…unless people become even cheaper to throw into dangerous situations. Why risk wasting a good drone when you have people to use instead?

If there is less risk, then there is also less risk for wars, so that the number of wars rises. And you know: the victims of wars are human beings - as always.

a necessary act, due to the aggressive nature of man, the need for protection of life and property. Drones do not use human pilots, therefore, less loss of life.

what side are you on?-just kidding of course