> There's already automated computer assisted surgery, so is this really that far off? Is it desirable? It's a question of cost and development effort versus u

> There's already automated computer assisted surgery, so is this really that far off? Is it desirable? It's a question of cost and development effort versus utility. You can train a good picker/harvester within just a few weeks and that person can work the fields seasonally for decades while doing other productive things for the rest of the year. Designing, building, deploying, and maintaining a machine complex enough to harvest asparagus, strawberries, and salad, however, is a very costly endeavour that yields very little benefit. The machines would cost billions to develop, millions to build, and are only usable for a short time of the year and for a very limited task. A minimum-wage field worker can do the job faster and cheaper and a machine would basically need to run half a century just to pay for itself - and that doesn't even include the development costs. Don't make the mistake to underestimate the amount of technology required to replace a human being for doing "simple tasks". Things that are simple for humans are incredibly hard for machines and vice versa.