The thing is, computers can make virtual mistakes with no consequences on reality; and then whichever approach works better in the simulation is what the robots will do for real. For some things, computers can already run simulations faster than real-time; it's only a matter of time before most of the relevant things can be simulated faster than a human brain can.
It appears to me that you are entirely missing my point? My point is a very high IQ one, so don't feel rejected.
For example, your statement assumes that there is a way to measure globally what is "better". My entire point is that there is no such metric, and that life is entropic meaning the possibilities (i.e. orthogonal probabilities and diversity) are always expanding, thus no one can know what is better
for everyone now, future, or in retrospect. Any one can from their arm chair claim that the present would be better had the past been such and such different, but this is incorrect because we can't change just one thing as other things are impacted in unpredictable ways (this is one reason top-down governance is such a failure, even if there were no corruption). Life is more localized variables than can be communicated to a single a metric in real time. If in fact we could transmit all the variables to a omniscient metric in real-time, then the past and present would collapse into a single point in time and the universe would not exist. Such a God would be quite lonely.
Kuzweil's Technological Singularity is nonsense. It essentially claims computers can become an omniscient God. He claims humans would no longer be able to reason about the future, because computers would be altering it ways and speed we humans can not compute fast enough. But it is already the case that no one can reason with certainty about the future in detail, especially the further it moves away from our localized situation. And he forgets that humans can leverage the computers. He entirely doesn't understand what creativity and knowledge are, nor what our universe is. Refer to my blogs for enlightenment:
http://unheresy.com/Information%20Is%20Alive.htmlhttp://unheresy.com/The%20Universe.htmlEven if you could simulate all the variables, then you would not have time to run a simulation and then go back and rerun it in real life to your omniscient advantage, because the simulation becomes a component of the real life thus impacting things in ways you can not predict. Don't forget Coase's Theorem and competition.
This is way over most of your heads. I think I will need to carefully write a book on this. And I don't have time right now.