If life is cheap and plentiful, wouldn't it be morally justifiable to kill people en masse for the greater good?

This is in the context of John DePillis' assertion that "an infinite number of people can live in peace and prosperity on a single planet." He goes on to say, "We know this because an infinite number of people can live in peace and prosperity on a black hole, the surface area of which is orders of magnitude smaller than a planet." (Sorry, I do not have a direct source, but this can be read about in the book The Singularity is Near, 2005)<br><br>If it becomes possible to upload people's consciousnesses into a virtual world, the potential for happiness becomes infinite, as well as the potential population, since you don't have to worry about the cost of simulating that person physically.<br><br>Hypothetically, you could upload the consciousnesses of people and create a utopia for them, and then just let the physical world crash. <br><br>It is not like we don't already do this to a degree, when police officers kill unarmed people, or the government shackles citizens with economics. Hell, we already know the life of one person is worth exactly 7.5 million dollars, and if the cost is higher than this for the government to do something to save a life, they don't have to do it.<br><br>I know this is a wildly hypothetical scenario, but an interesting one to consider. I am not advocating for anything, I am just bringing this up as a topic for discussion.<br><br>Edit: Reformatted as paragraphs for clarity.<br><br>Edit2: Added relevant source.<br><br>Edit3: Added the "if" prefix.<br><br>Edit4: It appears this topic may have already been considered by others. I was not aware of this before posting, but thanks to you beautiful people for letting me know.