I guess everybody here knows venerable C. Clarke predicted that work will disappear around 2075 (I think or somewhere around that year)...I don't know if he said what would happen with us at that time. There is something deeper than meets the eye: the only acceptable justification for the property right is the fact that individual property creates wealth (if you leave a piece of land to a bunch of too many guys nothing productive comes out of it...if you leave it to one guy and you create rules that protect that guy than you get some food). Once robots come into the picture (and I'm not talking only about these beginnings, I'm talking about the time when robots will be advanced enough say for a farm to be completely robotized and there will be robots making robots automatically...) this justification dies. In other words, rich guys are rich because they brought us something or they bring us something: walmart guy is reach because he sells cheap stuff bringing you an advantage, etc. Once everything is done by robots where's the merit of who? Also this justification of property works because to maintain being rich, on the long run, rich guys have to work. Once all this disappear why would the guy next door have something more than me? there is no reason. all the work is done by robots so another justification for allotment of resources has to be found... now, from here I can see only two exits: a very happy Karl Marx in the next world - everybody's equal as much as possible: i get to drive a ferrrari once every 5 years...you get to be on some cool yacht once every 10 years OR the rich try to maintain their advantage BY FORCE of technology and robots... now, which do you think is more likely? ...

Lately we humans have reached a level where we can cure or care for many congenital diseases, debilitating diseases, we care for our kind who are in need because they are disabilitated (from old crazy to new depressed). In other words many individuals who would have never survived in other ages, now survive and have children themselves. Even healthy individuals (who don't have cronic diseases or problems) would have died in other ages because of acute disease (now antibiotics stop that too).

Do you think this fight of us to care for all the individuals of our species is going to lead to a social hive or do you think will weaken the species and bring it to the brink of destruction? Or do you think no evolutionary danger comes from this new aspect of the human society? Where could we read some scientific arguments on this issue?

coffee table about coffee table anyone?

Now when this will be made available to humans the whole game will change again: Basically the corporate overlords will live forever and they will only have to change the workers generation by generation. This until they will create enough robots to do the job instead of the workers. Then most of the humanity will be kinda obsolete. They will live in closed premises, served by robots, having fun among them. the rest of us will freely participate in madmax

how likely is it that the speed of the neutrino exceeding the speed of light is so close to the speed of light? methinks not likely hence - systematic error as pointed above that closed the matter for me