There would have to be enforcement of child bearing. Overpopulation must be avoided. As for space, a modular apartment building could be built. Having everyone live in apartment buildings would be the most space efficient method. As for eating meat, that'd be a no. Inefficient, much better if everyone was a vegan

G3D, the Dalai Lama has concluded that the issue with all current communist failures is that they are founded on the poor fighting in anger against the rich. By the time they tear everything down, they've only succeeded in making everyone poor

Ok, I'm just trying to push the idea conceptually as far as it can go without any laws or restrictions. Perhaps we will have to enforce a limit on child bearing.

Life expectancy wouldn't increase dramatically, but the number of people who live to that expectancy will very high.

Nobody would have to become vegetarian. At first, when the population hasn't dramatically increased, we can still eat meats. Eventually we will be able to synthetically produce various meat-like substances. But yes, it would be wise for meat consumption to sharply fall.

The reason why "communism" has failed in the past is, as s said, the poor fighting in anger against the rich. Without money and with machines doing the demeaning jobs, everyone will be on the same level. Thus, this communism can work.

And also, civilization is not money. Civilization is a man-made ecosystem. A man-made ecosystem with money just separates us into different classes, with the poor (most) being lower in the food chain than the wealthy (few).

As against a man-made ecosystem with limited resources and no standard currency to trade in, which ended up evolving into one where we do have a standard currency and, in general, a better (though unfair) standard of living.

Regardless, if you were to get everyone on the world to eat the amount of meat the "middle-class" family did there just isn't enough room/resources for it to happen. To get everyone on a fairer platform the amout of meat consumed has to drop drastically.

Because its a recipe for chicken. Something that isn't very valuable.

If instead its a 'recipe' for a new form of computer that is 100x faster than anything else, he is not going to give it away for free. He is going to trade it for other powerful data someone else has that might be of benefit to him. There is a difference between infinite resources, and being able to use those resources. Data is what enables those resources to be used, as resources are useless unless you have the data/information with which to create the items you such desire.

To put it simply, instead of hoarding materials, people will hold data. It is already happening. I point you towards things such as industrial espionage, corporate/trade secrets, and the like.

Basically, instead of trading the raw resources with which to create items, people will instead trade stuff like schematics and device construction plans, personal information about others, software, etc. In essence, a data-based bartering system.