Not at all. You need sufficiently advanced AI, but the purpose is to preserve humanity. It's a one-way trip. You aren't doing anything on another planet that will affect Earth, just spreading the seed.
The sufficiently advanced AI is going to have to be able to do pretty much the same things humans can do for the thing to work, so it'd be a game-changer in itself, not something that gets waved off as an aside.
Re. the preservation thing, the question is exactly what counts as humanity. If you have limited resources and can only pick one, would you choose a planet colonized by biological humans who have lost all of the present civilization and language, and are reduced to stone-age conditions (assuming for the moment that the alien environment wouldn't kill them instantly), or synthetic beings with the sufficiently advanced AI with all human cultural knowledge and skills they'd need to survive on an alien planet and a cognitive and psychological makeup very close to actual humans they'd need to be able to raise babies into sane adults, and the ability to build more of themselves?
Basically, is humanity more about a culture or about being made of the correct chemicals?
Desperate times may require desperate measures. Robotic parents won't have to be close to human parents, just good enough to teach language and reading. The result may be psychologically unstable or mentally deficient children, but that may be corrected in a few generations.
Or not, as the case may be. That's why you send out many such probes. You would have to assume that most attempts would fail. You are, after all, attempting to transplant human life with no human oversight.
Either way, it's merely prolonging the inevitable. The Sun has about 5 billion years of fuel left, which is coincidentally about the time the Milky Way will collide with Andromeda, ruining everyone's day. The Sun would be far too hot to support life on Earth long before that, but let's assume we've moved to a more gentrified suburb. Even were humanity to somehow escape the Milky Way in the next 5 billion years, we'll still just be building sandcastle walls in an attempt to hold back the tide. I'm reminded here of Asimov's The Last Question, an excellent short story:
That scenario is impossible in an expanding universe. Regions of space eventually become disconnected from each other. There wouldn't be one computational entity overall, although there may be little dominant AIs inside these disconnected space bubbles.
Agree its posible. Robots don't need to teach kids alot. The ship could have a HD with the hole human knowlage on it. Like wikipedia on speed. Everything with videos (or directly to the brain?) from basic english to quantum phisiks. The robots have to feed them and stuff like that. Sperm and eggs are small enough that the can send them in big numbers.
Desing whan ship that can do that for 20 people and then just keep sending them.
(Just to be clear, my practical argument isn't "just send robots", it's "you're not going to know how to build good enough robots for the in-vitro thing to work".)
