Otherwise why build or purchase the machine?

But on the axis of supply and demand

If you've created a huge supply, but you've impoverished the people in the process by cutting out labor

labor is also a shiny object. and it puts some ppl to dissadvantage... children, elderly, disabled

lets say we have 4 machine systems. 1 to make houses, 1 to create food, 1 to distribute water, 1 to maintain, replace, or increase the output of the other 2 systems. All these systems are fully autonomous, meaning its sub components work to get the materials it needs to operate.

If you create huge economic surplus due to automation, you just find different ways of utilizing that surplus. You're going to allocate productivity in different sectors. The ownership class will enjoy more spoils.

You wind up with a massive supply, with little demand due to lack of funds

you now have all your basic human needs met without any human labor

who owns these machines? and how much do they cost? I mean, you don't need to make more machines, the 4th one does it for you. So how much does the bread cost? the water? the house?

no humans are needed to keep this system going or maintain it

the only need for a human is to say when more of something is needed

Grenade, nobody is making those machines for free.

Nobody is investing the time and money to build them expecting no return.

it doesn't matter why they made it, once it is made how much does it cost to maintain?

Yes it matters why they made it because they control them.

machines do... if you go from that point of automotive evolution

ai controls them

1 person verse....literally the world?

They can say if you don't pay me for the use of my machine you don't get the products they make.

and the world revolts

This conversation has become a hypothetical atop a hypothetical.

or they keep using those machines until they die

and someone else makes one

or someone steals the 4th machine

or the tech for it

This discussion is starting to smell like commies.

Or until war breaks down and breaks anywhere between one to four machines

or hacks it to make new copy of everything for them

machines revolt and we extinct... that usualy happen

in sci fi

I mean, depending on how much power we give to the machines

Deep down, I'm a naturalist and a survivalist, so none of this appeals to me in particular.

On a small scale, cheaper widgets. Neat.

On a large scale, though, it's fucked up.

I think it'd be absolutely awesome to have interactive AI that enhances the individual's abilities

yeah but how many ppl would not wanna work 9 to 5 every day?

There is always cost. There is always scarcity. Always. Never, ever use the word 'free' when it comes to anything in economics.

Also, if he made this machine, he would be in tremendous debt. that would be an R&D budget out the ass. So the first person to make that machine would need to either fund it entirely, or find a way to sell it

production does not equate to happyness. capitalism is a system that works to ensure the greatest production, that production is often translated into military might, that military might translates into a country that has the best foreign influince. i just discribed the united states or the british empire that preceeded it which though they did not fully embrace capitalism, had a head start. however simply being the most powerful nation in the world doesent mean you have the best system for your people, what it means is you have the best defense against outside influinces if you choose to do so...for your people (probably).

like an omnipresent personal assistant

like a Jarvis.