The Automaton (n.) serving a lazy, fully satisfied humanity is a myth, and taking it apart is a job for philosophy.
The Automaton (n.) is not a species of machine; there are only technical objects, carrying more or less automatism.
The Automaton (n.) is creation, not man: God made the world by the simplest and most general paths, and man submits to them.
An Automaton (n.) never has a problem of integration, because its structure has already decided what information it may ever receive.
The Automaton (n.) is kept upright by a formula of little balances; a living thing amplifies the very individuation that began it.
The Automaton (n.) lacks only this to be alive: it can close the gap between its act and a goal fixed beforehand, but it never finds new goals while it acts.
An Automaton (n.) is the one case where cause and purpose coincide, which is why Descartes made it his model of individuality, and why it could not explain a living body.
An Automaton (n.) that is perfect is a contradiction: with zero indeterminacy it could only repeat itself, and could never receive or emit a message, since a message needs a difference to make.