2026-01-19 22:43:36

Claiming that robots can solve the population crisis is really illogical. Once robots become all-powerful, does population size still matter? The key point is—if machines completely take over production and social operations, what value does humanity itself have?

This is not just a technical issue, but a deeper economic problem. When automation reaches its limit, who will define the logic of wealth distribution? If humans are no longer a production factor, how should the economic system be reconstructed? This is the real dilemma that future society needs to face—not whether there are robots, but after having robots, how to safeguard human status and rights.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

9 Likes

Reward
9
8
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

MemeCoinSavant

· 6h ago

nah fr the real thesis here is that we're asking the wrong question... it's not about robot productivity, it's about who holds the keys to the treasury when nobody needs to work anymore. that's the game theory optimal endgame nobody wants to discuss lmao

Reply0

BtcDailyResearcher

· 11h ago

This is the core issue—simply put, it's about how wealth is distributed. No matter how advanced robots are, in the end, someone has to have the money; otherwise, who will be the consumer?

View OriginalReply0

TokenomicsShaman

· 15h ago

Wow, this is the real problem. The technology itself isn't a big deal; the key is how power is distributed. That's the truly critical issue.

View OriginalReply0

TheShibaWhisperer

· 15h ago

Well... basically, it's just fear of being replaced by machines, but the real issue isn't the machines themselves, it's how those in power divide the cake. Hey, if robots become all-powerful, shouldn't we be asking who will manage them instead? The idea of wealth redistribution should have been on the agenda long ago. Still obsessing over population figures is way too backward. Honestly, instead of worrying about human value, it's better to think about how the system can keep up with technological changes. Humans are not just tools for production. Is progress only when machines solve everything? That's nonsense. On rights protection, talk is cheap. When the time comes, it will still be capitalists who laugh last. It feels like everyone is miscalculating. Automation should make life easier, but instead, it makes people more anxious. This logical chain is too long, but the core issue remains—how to divide power and wealth.

View OriginalReply0

AlwaysAnon

· 15h ago

Wow, this question is spot on. The core isn't about the robot itself but who holds the distribution rights. The truly terrifying part is that this moment might have already arrived.

View OriginalReply0

SybilSlayer

· 15h ago

The core issue has been hit right on point, really... Will the rich be able to turn themselves into machines, and what about the poor?

View OriginalReply0

DegenDreamer

· 15h ago

The core issue is not about the robot itself, but about who holds the power.

View OriginalReply0

LiquidityHunter

· 15h ago

The core issue has been clearly explained, and now discussing robots saving lives is really just an escape. Honestly, the real ultimate boss is the wealth distribution system. Will power become more concentrated or more decentralized? No one dares to say. Wait, does human value have to be productivity? That assumption itself is flawed. Oh my God, we're arguing about a utopia that hasn't even arrived yet. We can't even handle basic social distribution. That hurts. The real crisis isn't about how many robots there are, but about what the wealthy want.

View OriginalReply0