Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Smart-Tomato-4984 t1_jd2rnf2 wrote

Reply to comment by EddgeLord666 in A technical, non-moralist breakdown of why the rich will not, and cannot, kill off the poor via a robot army. by Eleganos

Killing people is technologically possible now, but human biological immortality is not. The latter is simply a harder problem than figuring out how to kill even large numbers of people. So probably medical advancements are not relevant to this debate about whether the rich might kill off the poor.

Also, biological immortality wouldn't make poor people un-kill-able. So again, it doesn't seem to be relevant.

1

EddgeLord666 t1_jd2rztr wrote

If biological immortality becomes possible, it will be more cost efficient to simply make it more widely available than to kill off massive numbers of people who will undoubtedly fight back (and as mentioned before it would lead to a civil war among the rich as well). You didn't address most of the other points though, whether the poor could theoretically be killed or not isn't really relevant.

1

Smart-Tomato-4984 t1_jd2v5xe wrote

Biological immortality is irrelevant. It won't exist any time soon and we aren't debating if the rich might kill off the poor 150 years from now, but in the near-term future.

Also, you can't fight back if you are dead. This is about advanced AI and robotics. Presumably the responsible party would kill everyone on the same day.

1

EddgeLord666 t1_jd2vb5c wrote

Again you're not responding to the points being made in the post. Also, it could easily exist by like 2050, we really don't know.

1

Smart-Tomato-4984 t1_jd2yykr wrote

I don't have to spend my time responding to all the points in your post.

1

EddgeLord666 t1_jd2z8lb wrote

It's not even my post lol, whoever wrote it is way more knowledgeable than me. My last word is this, if you don't have any counterarguments then stop bitching.

1