> Some kind of high level control will be needed Here's were all your reasoning is flawed. You're advocating for a tyrant, or a central authority like, guess w

> Some kind of high level control will be needed Here's were all your reasoning is flawed. You're advocating for a tyrant, or a central authority like, guess where/when: Venezuela or Soviet Russia. This has been attempted, and failed, several times before. We're not talking about Python, or the Linux kernel, in which their respective dictators don't even have that much say any more. We're talking about full societies here. And bunch of intelligent people, best case, can't direct full economies. There's nothing more decentralized and self correcting than capitalist free markets. And, yes, with appropriate regulations. Quoting, don't faint, Hayek The successful use of competition does not preclude some types of government interference. For instance, to limit working hours, to require certain sanitary arrangements, to provide an extensive system of social services is fully compatible with the preservation of competition. There are, too, certain fields where the system of competition is impracticable. For example, the harmful effects of deforestation or of the smoke of factories cannot be confined to the owner of the property in question. But the fact that we have to resort to direct regulation by authority where the conditions for the proper working of competition cannot be created does not prove that we should suppress competition where it can be made to function. https://mises.org/sites/default/files/Road%20to%20serfdom.pdf https://mises.org/sites/default/files/Road%20to%20serfdom.pd... Page 46 Capitalism is not endangered by the robot revolution. Capitalism is bringing the robot revolution. And it's going to prune the least productive, challenging, and fulfilling jobs, and we'll be forced to take on the high value jobs that will make humanity advance. It's been like this for millennia, an will be like this for a long time.