Many people does not necessarily mean they know everything that is needed.
-Yet the more people the better, our world now works in such a way that we have multiple people working to produce one product, like for cars we have engineers workers, people who do electronics, programs design and so on, in a way that the impossible work for one man is divided between several people which lets everyone do his job much better.

It also unrealistic to expect a computer to solve it. They can only handle what we program it to do.
-We could program it to outperform people in chess and other games that are not just do x then do y. I am not an expert in this so I don't know whether it is realistic or not but I think it is possible.

Basically I don't know of anything that can replace the tool that is called CURRENCY.
-doesn't mean that it doesnt exist or that we cant make such, also doesnt mean that it exist or can be made.

It as a universal means of exchange becomes a unit much like electricity that can be used to make anything else function without knowing the details
-well it functions but not always good, people lost a lot when their currency fallen and they couldnt do anything about it. I don't even know how all this economic stuff works with all this debts and other stuff.

Quantity of people does not solve all problems.
-maybe

In fact, it can introduce them.
-it may

It can become very easy for people to give into Appeals to Popularity. The entire "X amount of people believe it is true, or needed, so it must be" is actually a form of logical fallacy. Truth,and facts do not alter because X amount of people want it to be true.
-I think i know example when it does, language, where words and norms shift with the majority of population even if the majority makes a mistake it becomes a norm after some time. But I don't know how all this discussion is related to our subject.

For example: Would an entire stadium full of people have known what the needs and requirements of Albert Einstein, Nikola Tesla, Steve Wozniak/Jobs needed? Not very likely, and those are but a few examples.
-because those are random people, get a stadium of engineers and you will find what you need

Part of "innovation" and "invention" is the fact that someone is doing things other people have not seen before. Quantity of people and computers cannot predict that.
-Yes that is interesting idea, but it can just be solved by delaying it, that is what mostly happened in soviet union where they used to produce older stuff or modernize it because it was way more effective since you got all factories and workers and all chain of production already made, so the progress was made in leaps I guess not a steady grows, maybe it isnt so good but it is not a huge problem, instead of doing something that will have problems you have time to really think about all the problems.

I despise the concept of communism and socialism. I'll admit it freely.
-well you can do what you want

I consider them some of the most evil ideologies on the planet
-why? Answer to this question is the most interesting for me.

So I am biased, but I was not always that way. It took time, research, introspection, and a lot of thinking, debating, and reading of works recommended by proponents as well as revisiting older works people don't talk about much.
-well that is nice, I wish I could say the same

I believe the saying "Good ideas don't require force"
-people always disagree whatever you take whether it is iphone vs android or spending vocation at home or traveling the world, we all want justice but then which one? when you get paid for hours you worked? or when everone gets payd even? or when the one that needs most takes more? Communism itself doesnt tell you to do bad things, and neither does capitalism, yet people killed each other because of that. So many revolutions happened that brought us better world, would the world be better without them?

All of the things Communism and Socialism are alleged to solve I believe there is a BETTER way thanks to computers and technology today.
-i hope so

Yet, it is better because it can be voluntary (aka choice) based and does not require force, or government mandates. It does require a currency.
-why does it?

We cannot steal from you to fund things that you have no interest in.
-why then the wars are funded? do all people want it? or surveliance? most people don't have much money to really influence something to be built it is all in the hands of few people how is that democracy when a lot of people required to support production of one product while one man can build tens of factories and build whatever he wants. And while he does that he also benefits from people working for him.

And before you go "we gotta help the needy!!"
Do it. Help them. Yet don't do it by FORCING others to provide what you or someone else believes they SHOULD. That is not your choice. It is not my choice.
-if you dont force it happens what we have, capitalism doesnt reward you for doing that, it is even a punishment since your goal is to grow capital not give it away.
tell me do you really think it is not required to help others? wouldnt we all benefit from it in the end? a world where you are protected where people help you? A country where everyone does what he wants doesnt exist. Is it really better to "not force" a good thing and have it all not forced bad? Why is it bad to help others? Don't you won't need to worry about healthcare because it is free, you won't need to worry about your student loan because eduction is free, it all would benefit us all doesnt it?
In capitalism actually you need poor people, how else can you force them to do the job nobody wants to do?

Also so much of communism and socialism are fueled by Envy, and false equivalencies.
-envy? really? maybe people did french revolution because of envy? They are fueled by hope and other things but does it matter what it is fueled by?

They are bad ideas, evil, and cannot exist without force.
-if you want to convince someone tell why, just saying its bad doesnt work, this is very biased topic you need to explain your ideas. and ideas can exist without force, then again why it cannot exist?