I think in the long run the software will do a much better job than a person Software is good at doing a single, static, well-defined job many times. What peo

I think in the long run the software will do a much better job than a person Software is good at doing a single, static, well-defined job many times. What people do much better than software is adopt to change, deal with unexpected events, and communicating with other people. Anyway, my point is not that software isn't doing a good job, it's that there is a turnover point... We are not even a century into computing and look what we already have achieved Yes. No arguing that. But no trend ever keeps going in the same direction forever. It could well be that the diminishing returns for adding more software have already started. That is because you define your world as the action of going to work in order to receive food and shelter. No, I don't. You couldn't be more wrong about that. This does not necessarily have to be your world. I say we should leave this world to machines But do you believe this? Can we "leave the world to machines"? (or, to any abstraction?) Who controls these machines? They put all the worlds power in a few hands -- if we live at their whim, do they have your best interest in mind? And even if they do now, will they always have our best interests in mind? (if not, it is very unstable) The problem reaches much deeper than just "the distribution mechanism". We already have a big problem with getting such basics as food all over the planet, and that's not because the mechanisms don't exist... while everybody can go on to do what he is really passionate about. I agree that would be great. We could do that already now. We could take care of the poor and un(der)employed people, step out of the consumerist mindset, and stop worrying and trying to control everyone's every actions. The problem is that it requires a shift in the mindset of people. Until we figure that out, I have very little belief in this "loving machine future".