Making better hardware and software for controlling hardware is something that is very difficult (hence most the machines having a hard time with the most basic

Making better hardware and software for controlling hardware is something that is very difficult (hence most the machines having a hard time with the most basic things for a human - walking, etc.), and because of this, most regard robots as being in their infancy, with many more generations to go before we have a robot that can truly function like a human (in the physical sense). What's alarming about this is the fact that all of these problems are problems that are solved by intelligence and brute force, and both of these functions can be performed in the virtual world, but a lot of the fears we have about "robocalypse" scenarios are rooted in the physical aspects of robots (e.g., autonomous drones with guns, etc.). Given a computer system with intelligence much greater than a human (not necessarily passing the Turing test or being intelligent by certain human metrics, but being very effective at problem solving and engineering) could result in most of the current problems that companies like Boston Dynamics, et al have been working on for years being solved and tested in simulations in mere minutes. Such a machine can't just be invented, but through evolution (genetic algorithms, etc.) on the copious cloud computing environments, such a machine will eventually happen, unless something changes (e.g., laws to attempt to prevent it, disaster of some sort that sets us back financially and computer-wise a few decades, etc.). This means, the thing we should really fear is machine intelligence, since the physical world aspect of its existence is really secondary. A machine that can design better solutions to physical world problems (like moving around, negotiating obstacles, etc.) than the hundreds of teams working on the same thing is what I fear.