The smart way to become an interplanetary species would be to throw money at physics research and AI.
The technological payback from an automated grocery store is unlikely to help us get to Proxima Centauri.
That sounds harsh, but I think there's a fallacy in believing that technological progress is cumulative, and each small step - no matter how tangential - gets you closer to the big goal.
It's like arguing that if you keep developing steam engines you eventually get a modern airliner.
In fact you only get a modern airliner with completely new technologies, including GPS, composites, fly-by-wire, digital airflow modelling, and so on.
You can't build an A380 with Victorian sheet metal and rivets, no matter how many times you iterate.
And there's something Victorian about Amazon's need to dominate and mechanise every possible consumer market. The single-pointed focus makes it smarter than legacy corps when it comes to retail, but it absolutely does not follow that this proves Amazon is smart enough to invent its way out-of-system.
I don't know anything about physics research, but it would seem that there is a more nuanced balance between basic research and things that can be applied soon. Basic research requires a high risk tolerance and deep pockets, but a potentially huge return.
For example, I can't imagine how much money Google has sunk into self-driving. And, it's now looking like they'll make it back thousands of times over. But, years ago, it could have failed after a 9 or 10 figure investment. To sustain that (outside of government funding), you have to be doing something else that pays the bills.
At least with your given example you effectively cannot reach the scientific knowledge required to manufacture composites and especially turbines without already having a complete understanding of steam power. One is substantially less complicated both theoretically and implementation wise than the other.
And, from a business perspective, if you don't grab the low hanging fruit now to stay competitive your competition will and you will find yourself obsoleted and bankrupt on your quest for airliners in the age before steam trains.
The technological payback from an automated grocery store is unlikely to help us get to Proxima Centauri.
That sounds harsh, but I think there's a fallacy in believing that technological progress is cumulative, and each small step - no matter how tangential - gets you closer to the big goal.
It's like arguing that if you keep developing steam engines you eventually get a modern airliner.
In fact you only get a modern airliner with completely new technologies, including GPS, composites, fly-by-wire, digital airflow modelling, and so on.
You can't build an A380 with Victorian sheet metal and rivets, no matter how many times you iterate.
And there's something Victorian about Amazon's need to dominate and mechanise every possible consumer market. The single-pointed focus makes it smarter than legacy corps when it comes to retail, but it absolutely does not follow that this proves Amazon is smart enough to invent its way out-of-system.