Grainis, your reply speaks for itself, however you highlight objections others may have, and therefore present an opportunity to address them respectfully & constructively.
Overall, regarding all innovation (and Human progress in general), it is important to not let old/prior Limiting Beliefs hinder our progression forward.
Generally, the innovation herein proposed utilizes leading edge technology to solve a fundamental problem at a deep enough level to preclude the issues you highlight. Additional details at https://www.virtualabundance.com
In other words, if we can manifest this innovation, the issues you raise will become moot over a short period of time (as Humans will finally be so busy enjoying their lives, they won't need or want to relive the drama & limitations of generations prior ..any more than people today choose to carve their words into stone).
More specific responses to your reply..
Borrowing your words:
"MARX says - this will become possible ONLY when the MEANS of production are developed so much to produce Unlimited Quantities of Goods, enough for everybody's full satisfaction, no matter of his contribution to the society."
This innovation enables that very thing ..(along with many other positive outcomes).
It does so by simultaneously decreasing dependence upon and increasing efficient use of scarce resources (i.e. Quantities of Goods) ..while providing participants a world of virtual abundance to live life as they choose.
"For example - you are a Janitor, cleaning rooms 4 hours per day, but you have a red Ferrari and a clean Condo - the same which the Professor has, who designs Nuclear Power Stations, working 14 hours per day."
A lot to unpack here, but quick takeaways:
Within the proposed innovation..
..a Janitor will no longer need to be so (unless he chooses for enjoyment sake)...as this innovation largely and/or entirely (Phase 2) precludes the need for such service & maintenance.
..a Professor will no longer need to design Nuclear Power Stations or work 14 hour days...as the net accumulating benefit of this innovation results in dramatically fewer collective resources being consumed. Eventually to a point where humanity can exist symbiotically within the resources provided & generated by Earth's ecosystem (without need for Nuclear or other polluting forms of energy).
"You are saying in your site - all of us will live in same small, fine, pretty, clean Condos.
Who will BUILD these condos ? Who will FURNISH, CLEAN and MAINTAIN them ?"
'FURNISH, CLEAN and MAINTAIN' ..addressed above.
'Who will BUILD these condos' ..who builds them now? How much are they paid, at what interest rate, and for how long? And is not Real Estate the #1 source of 'wealth building' in the world? If someone is becoming wealthy, does that not indicate a payment/value imbalance? And at what cost? How many are homeless or struggling with mortgages?
These questions are not intended to be an indictment on capitalism, rather a point of clarity on our collective values and how they may be unintentionally hindering our progression forward.. ..'unless' we remain open to alternatives that benefit everyone (including the 1%) rather than just the 1%. Moreover, this issue becomes moot entirely within Phase 2 of this innovation.
"All we need is MORE HUMANS to produce that all .
Jeff Bezos said we'll need TRILLIONS of Humans ."
Who is going to create all those humans? And do/will they 'want' to be compelled to 'produce' for your purposes?
"Having these new worlds we could maybe reach that level of production of goods when everybody will have everything he needs, in a reasonable volume, without the mandatory need to work ."
How is creating an entire new (physical) world, in low earth orbit no less (when it costs $10,000.00 per pound to put things in orbit; https://www.nasa.gov/centers/marshall/news/background/facts/astp.html
), somehow going to be done without anyone working?
How do you reconcile these two statements?
1. "Having these new worlds we could maybe reach that level of production of goods when everybody will have everything he needs, in a reasonable volume, without the mandatory need to work ."
2. "All we need is MORE HUMANS to produce that all .
Jeff Bezos said we'll need TRILLIONS of Humans ."
And, how do you propose to get so many people to submit to those labor needs?
Why would they want to donate their Blood, Sweat, Tears, & Soul to your 1000 year objective..
..when they can achieve better collective & individual outcomes with zero sacrifice, while enjoying their lives?
"If we learn to reasonably use the desert zones as Savannas, Deserts, Tundras, Oceans, Mountains, Poles, we could build an entire new world ."
Are we not attempting to do this already? And how is that turning out? In a way that would prompt your suggestion that we need to build an entire new world?
"But if you are only a TV-Watcher, PC-Game-Player and Popcorn-Eater, the society will find the way to cut and trough you out as a tumor, for sure."
Nature has a way of doing that already (health outcomes). Participants in/of this innovation would not be doing as you are suggesting here. Rather they would be able to utilize and enjoy their new found Freedom (Time & Resources) to pursue that which brings them passion. The net effect on participants will be to eliminate an infinite number of stress triggers ..freeing their minds to self-actualize (i.e. explore, find true passions & talents, self educate, and express their unique creative & productive capacity as individual passions guide).
"It won't take too much time - we'll only need probably about 1,000 years or more, IMHO."
Seems you have no intention of being around to inhabit the world you propose.
"And WHO will PAY for that ? You say - GOVERNMENTS !
Is this cute? https://www.cheatsheet.com/money-career/high-on-the-hog-the-top-8-corporate-welfare-recipients.html/
Do you enjoy your hard-earned Government tax dollars continually funneling unnecessarily to the 1%?
..or subsidizing Government neglect, mismanagement, & corruption?
Maybe there's a better path forward. https://www.virtualabundance.com/project-info