First Law:
A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
Second Law:
A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
Third Law:
A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

---

However, how would one limit a medical robot that performs surgery? It will initially "hurt" the patient for the benefit of that patient.
Or if a Police robot need to stop a perpetrator that aim to severely hurt or kill a child?

I will work - for several reasons.

There's Thorium... and if we can get rid of the ineffective submarine reactors currently in use in the power plants, we can extract lots more energy from the current nuclear waste.

Last I saw the estimates, it would produce energy for the entire world for over 50 years just by using the existing nuclear waste, because we use only about 10% at the moment. As an additional bonus, it would decrease the amount of waste and reduce the level of radiation tenfold.

Not really the right direction.
Modern nuclear is just about the only reasonable option. Really.

(Ref. Michael Schellenbergers TED-talk, Sunniva Rose's TEDx-talk, Pandoras Promise, Youtube: "thorium remix", etc...)

Yup, Synergy would be my choice as well.

But.
If the computers are on the same network, one could use PC1 as base and use RDP / VNC to display the screens of the computers when needed.

No, not the current breed of dangerous water-cooled reactors.
LFTR FTW! ...or even better, run the world on nuclear waste for the next 50+ years.

Regarding the limited PC.

It's already done, it's called The Mac.
Well, almost.

The iPhone is like that. Still, I don't think there are any limitations to where you want to call.

It seems public health insurance works in other communist(?) states, like (in no specific order) Norway, France, Sweden, Canada, the UK and so on... Insurance companies are evil by default, they want to KEEP your money.