Predicting Life 100 Years From Now 552
New submitter Simon321 writes "BBC News has an interesting article about the top predictions for life 100 years from now. The highlights include extensive farming of the ocean, wiring all sorts of computers to our brains, space elevators, and the break-up of the United States. 'There are some indications already that California wants to split off and such pressures tend to build over time. It is hard to see this waiting until the end of the century. Maybe an East Coast cluster will want to break off too. Pressures come from the enormous differences in wealth generation capability, and people not wanting to fund others if they can avoid it.'"
Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (Score:2, Informative)
'There are some indications already that California wants to split off and such pressures tend to build over time. It is hard to see this waiting until the end of the century. Maybe an East Coast cluster will want to break off too. Pressures come from the enormous differences in wealth generation capability, and people not wanting to fund others if they can avoid it.'
And who is making such outrageous claims? A geologist? Perhaps a seismologist? Perhaps even just some sort of basic scientist?
From the beginning of the article:
Here is what futurologists Ian Pearson (IP) and Patrick Tucker (PT) think of your ideas.
"Futurologist?" What does it take to call oneself a 'futurologist?'
Well, from Ian Pearson's page [futurizon.com] I'd guess he's got some communication technology background? Or perhaps an author? From his list of achievements:
Ian Pearson has been a full time futurologist since 1991, with a proven track record of around 85% accuracy at the 10 year horizon.
So you could estimate he has a (0.85)^10 or ~19.7% accuracy at the 100 year horizon? Do you get to pick which issues you have
Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (Score:5, Informative)
ROTFL. They're talking about California breaking off politically, not physically.
Their predictions are still so much bunk, and calling them sci-fi authors smears the good name of actual sci-fi authors.
Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (Score:4, Interesting)
The South/Tea Party will break off well before Cali.
Eastern California (conservative) is very different from Western California (liberal) as well.
I think certain states should form providences and have more control, but I have no clue how that would happen smoothly.
Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (Score:4, Interesting)
I agree. If anyone would break away from the US, it would be the southern states. California may be the capital of American liberalism, but they're getting along just fine as is. Still, the idea of anyone breaking away right now is ludicrous. The people who express such opinions are all toothless morons that nobody listens too anyway.
Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (Score:4, Insightful)
but they're getting along just fine as is. Still, the idea of anyone breaking away right now is ludicrous.
They aren't suggesting right now. They're suggesting sometime in the next 100 years. That's a log time. The last US civil was only a bit more than a hundred years ago. The USSR only lasted 69 years.
The key is that "getting along just fine as is" bit. Those days are numbered. China is taking over as world superpower. That's going to have interesting effects on the USA.
Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (Score:5, Funny)
China is taking over as world superpower.
Am I the only one who welcomes that? Awesome, I say! Everyone and his grandma can blame all their miseries on China for the next century.
Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (Score:5, Funny)
I have just arrived here from the year 2112 in my time machine to answer a few of your questions.
The South did win the war against the north due to everyone migrating into Canada. The problem with that is that the South wasn't happy being one state, so South North declared war on the South South which sat at a stalemate for years until Canada finally annexed the south and polited the southerners into submission. All sports other then hockey are now banned in Greater Canada and the beverage previously known as Beer in the former US was renamed "Goats Piss" by His Royal Openness Michael Geist and the 1st open source monarch.
Overpopulation was solved by the zombie crisis of 2035. The zombies actually won that but we were able to stall them by giving them their own sitcom. Groaning Pains is now in it's 76 th season although the corpse of Michael J Fox wont last that many more seasons.
China never became a real superpower because they couldn't make a decent cappuccino.
Most oil reserves ran out in 2048, in 2049 an enterprising geneticist came up with the idea of cloning dinosaurs from DNA encased in fossilised mosquitoes which then could be raised on a Costa Rican Island and turned into oil. Apart from the odd human consumption incident, this has been a smashing success.
The break up of the European Union was announced in 2014, as of December 2111, the EU parliament still hasn't got a working plan on how to facilitate the break up.
First contact was made in 2076. A ship landed in southern Fiji, initially hostile the insectoid aliens were pacified by giving them candy. in 2078 the KzsSSNRRG declared war on Earth to secure candy supplies. The Department of Homeworld Security was formed although quickly disbanded after they discovered the KzsSSNRRG's exoskeleton deflected millimetre wave scanners and no one wanted to give them an enhanced pat down. The war raged on in the stars for years with the Earth Defence Forces slowly falling back until we were able to clone Casper Van Diem.
Flying cars are still 20 years away.
Wikipedism is now bigger then Islam and Christianity combined. Jimmy Wales was deified on his death bed and now millions of people now start their days by staring and offering a personal appeal Jimmy Wales.
The Apple-Google wars of 2018 were as short lived as they were fierce. Apple lost the conflict because they used shiny white armour that could be spotted a mile away and their guns could only fire one bullet before having to be reloaded.
Lord British took over the British isles in 2023. He implemented an experience point for all working residents of great Britain. One earned XP at whatever job they do. It's the only place on earth where a level 73 Tea Lady beats a Level 42 CEO.
Richard M Stallman was lost forever on 14 August 2041. His home was searched by police but all they found was an empty bottle of soap and a recently used razor.
Copyright is now life of the sun plus 10,000 years, but Bit Torrent still works.
If you would excuse me, I must return to my own time. Typing on keyboards is so quaint, in the future we just shout "Bingle, Porn" and it does everything automatically.
Farewell.
Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (Score:5, Informative)
The key is that "getting along just fine as is" bit. Those days are numbered. China is taking over as world superpower. That's going to have interesting effects on the USA.
Can we PLEASE stop with the China thing? They own less than 9% of U.S. debt. They do not have any meaningful middle class. They offer nothing in the way influence on the world stage beyond that which they have with a few questionable regimes. China will be a power. Maybe a super power, but they're a long, very long way away from parity with Europe much less United States.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
If anyone would break away from the US, it would be the southern states.
I'm *pretty* sure they tried that once before.
California may be the capital of American liberalism, but they're getting along just fine as is.
Oh, sorry, I didn't realize you were posting from an alternate universe.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think certain states should form providences and have more control, but I have no clue how that would happen smoothly.
We had that before - before, as you say, "They tried that once." It's called State's Rights, and the loss of the war of northern aggression assured a strong federal government and the loss of state's individuality.
Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (Score:5, Insightful)
You spelled "War of Southern Treason" wrong.
The South started the war, so I fail to see how it could be Northern aggression.
Re: (Score:3)
"Unless my high school history has failed me (again), the southern states seceded, and the northern states used military force to bring them back."
That's about as accurate as a single sentence can be to describe the Civil War... It's a lot more nuanced (as you indicate with your "Fort Sumter" comment).
o South secedes and forms own Government
o North doesn't recognize secession -- seeks a political solution.
o South wants Federal forts
o North refuses.
o South blockades forts with force
o North continues to atte
Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (Score:5, Insightful)
low taxes, small government, etc - and other tea party type things
don't fool yourself, they also want to meddle.
Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (Score:4, Interesting)
Mod parent up. The Republican party is disintegrating because while they point their fingers at each other screaming "RINO! RINO!" the fact is that just about everyone but Ron Paul is Conservative In Name Only. Oh, they'll tell you how they'll cut the Energy department and the Education department, and they'll make a lot of noise about unions (except the police unions, they vote Republican) and they'll make a lot of noise about cutting spending (except for in their state, and even Ron's a perpetrator of this, excusing it by claiming that principles be damned, when everyone else is sidling up to the trough he's doing Texas a disfavor by not pigging out with the rest of the hogs) and smaller government (except for the parts that prop up their campaign donors and inspect citizens' bedrooms, monitor everything they smoke, read their email, fondle their kids, xray them when they fly, ride a train, drive a car, and so on).
Actions speak louder than words. The Republican party is doomed, and it's entirely the "moderates" fault, only the people screaming about moderates have been shown to be some of the worst of the lot despite their words.
Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (Score:4, Funny)
And that third one. Whatever it was. Damn. I never remember which one I mean.
Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (Score:5, Funny)
Someone will invent a way of making text more readable, perhaps by splitting it into smaller chunks.
Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (Score:5, Funny)
China is not exactly a "backwater". They even have Starbucks there now.
Re: (Score:3)
I am a southerner myself. Do I feel bad about mocking the fucking Tea Party traitors who want to destroy my state and my country? Fuck no, I am an American Patriot. How is that stupid?
Re: (Score:3)
Sounds more like the Occupy Movement... the funny thing is even as you don't like the fringe, I rather doubt you like the center either.
How were the Occupy Movement going to shut down the government? sitting on the steps of capitol hill and chanting while they get shot, pepper sprayed and hauled off to jail? The tea party held the US and global economy hostage to to extract tax breaks for billionaires in a time of crisis.
While Occupy didn't speak with a single unified voice, the general message was to purge corruption and collusion from the banking industry and government. That was definitely a good message and fairly well aimed.
Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (Score:4, Insightful)
I wish I had mod points. I lived in the south and was saddened by what I was seeing:
Many of the smart and ambitious leave. The culture, though, remains in place: an ever more pointless divide between the rich and poor (or lucky and unlucky.) Low taxes mean low social services for the poor and insular privately provided schools and social services for the rich, and pretty soon you have an out-of-touch and uneducated rich class and an out-of-touch and uneducated poor class.
If you don't get out of the south at age 21, you are screwed.
Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (Score:5, Interesting)
If you don't get out of the south at age 21, you are screwed.
Unless you live in Huntsville. I lived there for awhile in the 90s. Strange place, it was like everyone who knew anything went to Huntsville. Because of NASA and the missile development contractors etc. Everyone had a security clearance and was involved in something interesting. If you didn't want to be the only literate person in your rural village, but still wanted to eat grits and pecan pie, you moved to Huntsville and got a govt job building missiles and whatever. I donno what its like now, but it was a heck of a great place as a young technological man in the 90s. I still culturally attach myself to the hightech redneck meme or whatever, even 20 years later.
The culture, though, remains in place
It was a weird experience to tune the radio around and hear American Dissident Voices being broadcast. It can take some getting used to. Also, everyone, and I mean everyone, seems to go to church or lies and says they do and nothing but evangelical christianity for the whites, baptist for the blacks, and catholicism for the illegals exists, as in mentally provincially no other religious existence is even conceivable or expressible. Its not all bad, some of the nicest folks I've met have followed the southern gentleman ideal of hospitality and respect, and the brotherhood of hightech rednecks knows no limit, if you know how to program a microcontroller and cut threads on a metal lathe and you meet another hightech redneck its like you're insta-adopted into the family, which is nice and friendly but sure takes a bit to get used to for a frigid northerner.
Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (Score:4, Interesting)
I'd personally like to see northern California (I'm not so sure about the southern part; that seems to be the source of most of their budget problems) break off, and join with Oregon and Washington and become a new country. Between Silicon Valley, Portland, and Seattle, the economy in that region is huge, leading the world even. California itself already has the 6th-largest (I think, maybe it's 8th) economy in the whole world, all by itself. Again, I'm not sure how much of that is from the south vs. the north, but I theorize that the north might have the majority because of Silicon Valley. OR and WA also have tons of tech companies. Together, they'd be a great economic power if they could just keep the SanFran liberals under control so they don't ruin the budget. (I'm not arguing for extremist Tea Party principles here, just some moderation; you can't keep your government afloat when you're spending more money than you take in in tax revenue on free services for everyone.)
It'd be even better if they could get British Columbia break away from Canada and join them, as Vancouver is also very strong in tech, and is also an important shipping port for access to the rest of Canada. The local cultures between Vancouver and WA/OR seem to be fairly similar too. Surely the Vancouverites have more in common with Seattle residents than with Quebec residents.
Re: (Score:3)
If a civil war erupted once before over Southern Secession, I doubt we'll see a repeat over California. Such a breakup would have to be mutual, and California simply has too many natural resources (oil, coasts, winter growing seasons, movie stars) for the rest of the union to want to give them up. No matter how weird they are.
Wait a minute. This isn't a "future prediction", it's the setting of Snow Crash. I knew it seemed familiar.
What's next out of these "futurists"? Rat-things? Cosa Nostra Pizza? C
Re: (Score:3)
Visa? That's dumb, obviously it's going to be Bitcoins.
Re: (Score:3)
Visa? That's dumb, obviously it's going to be Bitcoins.
Perhaps it would be now, but Bitcoin didn't exist in 1992 [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:3)
I'm in the great (*cough*) state of California, and in 20 years I've not heard any talk of secession.
Cripes, that would make it a country with the ability to print its own money, right? We'd have a debt of $800 trillion in the first year as they built every government crony and connected douchebag a palace to official fung shui standards.
Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (Score:5, Insightful)
Not just the British Empire. The Roman Empire, the Ottoman Empire, The Russian Empire, The French Empire, The Spanish Empire, the USSR.
Empires rise, and then they fall again. The USA is on the same path as all the empire before it. Only the timing varies.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (Score:5, Insightful)
Futurologists don't need a background in science, only an audience.
+Inf Insightful (Score:3)
I actually took an elective called "The Future of Technology" for my undergrad degree.
The whole field is a bunch of BS and guesswork. It makes Psychoanalysis look like a hard science. I would sooner believe someone who says the world will end on December 12, 2012, than any "futurologist."
And the reason is exactly as you said: all they want is for people to believe what they say, and pay them money to say more.
From my own observations, there seem to be two types of "futurologists:"
1) Those who make grandio
Re: (Score:3)
Indeed. Ever look at the predictions from 1912 about how life would be in a hundred years? I expect ours will be about as accurate.
Re: (Score:3)
Titanic still afloat, flying cars common (make that just cars - Ed) and the year of Linux on the desktop just around the corner.
Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (Score:5, Funny)
The difference between a "futurologist" and a "psychic friend" is apparently $1.99 per minute, and you must be over 18 to call.
Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (Score:5, Funny)
"Futurologist?" What does it take to call oneself a 'futurologist?'
I am a futurologist
I wasn't sure until I tried it, but it's pretty easy.
Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (Score:5, Funny)
I will be a futurologist. See, it's working already!
Re: (Score:3)
I'm a futurologist. I've posted my predictions numerous times here on Slashdot. I'm sure many people have read them. They may not have agreed, but it's hard not to read random posts when browsing Slashdot articles, before deciding "this guy's a moron!". All this together makes me a futurologist.
Of course, since I don't get paid for my opinions, that probably makes me an "amateur futurologist", unlike the professionals who get paid by writing click-bait.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm surprised nobody challenged the 10 billion prediction- since current demographic trends say we'll be unlikely to finish the century with more than 4 billion human beings (Huge dyeoffs of humans are currently scheduled for the 2040-2060 range, as 2/3rds of humanity right now is over the age of 55, and while the third world has helped us keep up, huge numbers of people under the age of 30 simply are no longer breeding).
Dyeoffs? (Score:3)
What are you saying? Prejudice will kill them after we color them purple?
Temples of Syrinx (Score:5, Funny)
We will find a guitar, but it will be destroyed by the priests, declaring it is a "silly whim".
Re: (Score:2)
Attention all planets of the Solar Federation, the RIAA has assumed control.
I call Jetsons (Score:2)
It's like shenanigans but for future predictions beyond the thirty year mark, which are bullshit by definition.
California wants to split off (Score:2)
CYA!
( like the feds would ever let that happen anyway )
Re:California wants to split off (Score:4, Insightful)
From a canuck pov, California is a lot like Quebec. Both have large debts, highly self-inflated opinions of themselves, and have a highly convoluted parasitic nature with both the federal government and other states/provinces. If they went up and left, they'd be in a crash bankruptcy within 2 years, and be begging to come back, as their own entitlement programs would cause them to collapse from within. As it stands now, their own entitlement programs are causing them to collapse from within.
Re:California wants to split off (Score:4, Informative)
Oops. Your conservative is showing.
California is the 8th largest economy in the world. Period. It would be a world power on it's own.
California would do quite well on it's own given it's natural resources and it's western US shipping ports.
California sees less return on federal dollars than is taken in taxes. (Who's the parasite, again?)
California's population and land size give it country sized problems with state sized control and funds.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
California sees less return on federal dollars than is taken in taxes.
Really? You mean the government can't give out more money to the states than it takes in in taxes... oh right, I suppose it does that all the time.
California has a whopping 12.5% unemployment, and managed to double their state spending in 10 years. Let me repeat that: double, from 1998 to 2008. One does not have to be a conservative to realize that California has a spending problem. Everyone there realizes it. One of the highest tax rates in the country, and they still can't find enough money.
Re:California wants to split off (Score:4, Informative)
Yeah, don't bother looking up the statistics [taxfoundation.org] or anything. Just make a sarcastic comment to insinuate you know what you're talking about.
In 2005, California paid $290 billion in taxes and received $240 billion in federal spending. California's deficit currently stands at $11 billion [nytimes.com]. Now, I'm no mathematician, but I'm pretty sure 290 - 240 > 11.
Re:California wants to split off (Score:5, Interesting)
According to the libertarian (and Koch-funded) Tax Foundation, California has paid more into federal coffers than it has taken in federal spending since 1986 ( http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/22685.html [taxfoundation.org] page 5). And its share that it has given has grown in relation to the amount that it has taken.
There are eighteen states that actually pay their own way, or better, according to the latest data they have collected
( http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/266.html [taxfoundation.org] they're in the process of collecting funds for an updated look at more recent numbers). Seventeen of those states went for Obama / Biden in 2008.
One does not have to be a conservative to pass judgment on states leeching government money, but it helps perhaps to be in one when 94.4% of the states that do pay their own way went Democratic in the last Presidential election.
The question is therefore not "why is California spending so much more?", but why are the Red States outstripping California's spending with nothing to back up THEIR leeching ways, playing bootstrappy cowboy at the expense of people in LA, New York, Chicago, etc.?
Re: (Score:3)
Just like Quebec, CA would split very shortly after leaving the union.
S. Cal would be completely dry. (USA would take the rest of the CO river for Vegas. N. Cal would shut down the ditch. Owens valley might have something to say as well.)
Perhaps Mexico will take S. Cal. They can have it.
Re:California wants to split off (Score:4, Informative)
California sees less return on federal dollars than is taken in taxes. (Who's the parasite, again?)
You sure about that? Hint: look at all the Federal expenditures in California, including welfare.
Yes, we are sure. Our federal tax imbalance is similar in size to our budget deficit.
You could at least base your claims on logic and numbers instead of emotion and expectations.
[1] 2009 Tax Burden Report [taxfoundation.org]
[2] 2006 Tax Burden Report [taxfoundation.org]
[3] Tax burden by state, 1981-2005 [taxfoundation.org]
[4] California 2011-12 Budget Outlook [ca.gov]
Re: (Score:3)
California sees less return on federal dollars than is taken in taxes. (Who's the parasite, again?)
You sure about that? Hint: look at all the Federal expenditures in California, including welfare.
OK, let's look at, say, the 2006 report from the Tax Foundation [taxfoundation.org]. What it says about Federal expenditures is
Re:California wants to split off (Score:5, Interesting)
No. Actually.
California is having budget issues mostly because the federal government is raping it, so that its wealth can be redistributed to Republican owned southern and midwestern states. Californians pay far more in federal tax than they receive back in federal benefits. If California was on its own and took those federal taxes itself, its debt would be gone almost immediately.
Re:California wants to split off (Score:5, Informative)
You completely miss the point. California, and most of the "blue" states, are "giver" states - their citizens and businesses pay more in federal tax (income and otherwise) than they receive back as services. California receives $0.78 (in things like highway dollars and education) per dollar of tax paid. source [taxfoundation.org]. For fun, compare "red" states with "blue" states. About 75% of Bush and Gore's electoral votes came from taker and giver states, respectively.
The GP's point was that if those 25c no longer "left" the state, California would be better off.
The best part was you complaining about ignorance and being "factually wrong".
Re:California wants to split off (Score:5, Insightful)
First, the GP said nothing about the state budget.
Second, that's a perfect example of the broken window fallacy. The citizens pay the Federal Government, and in so doing, give it money that cannot be spent for other things. The correct question is how much the citizens of California as a whole send to the federal government versus the amount that the federal government sends back. The answer to that is "a lot more", with the sole exception of the last couple of years (in which California has gotten more than it sent in, but so has every other state). In most years, California gets back somewhere in the ballpark of eighty cents for every dollar it sends to the feds.
Again, the amount is immaterial. What's important is the cost-benefit ratio. The blue states, on the average, get far less benefit for their federal tax dollars than the red states. This is fairly well established and can be trivially proven by examining the numbers.
Unless, of course, you consider the security benefits. Consider how the wide difference in wealth between the U.S. and Mexico has caused serious safety problems near our Southern border. Now consider what would happen if the Southern U.S. were similarly poor because California stopped propping them up. And that is why the argument of California getting less out than it puts in falls flat—not because it isn't true from a purely numbers point of view, but rather because there are unquantifiable externalities that the argument fails to take into account.
That's grossly incorrect [taxfoundation.org].
Re:California wants to split off (Score:4, Informative)
As a Canadian currently living in Quebec... I don't think you're right. California seems to be reasonably productive, at least compared to the rest of the US. It has a large debt, but so does the rest of the country. I believe they even pay out more in taxes than they take in from the feds.
Quebec on the other hand has always been a gimme province, has a population who prefer not to work all that hard (not saying there's anything wrong with that, provided you can pay for it yourself) and systemic corruption levels FAR above the rest of Canada. They're also isolationist, and anti-English, which can't help when all your neighbours and potential trading partners are English speaking countries.
Quebec can't even keep their bridges and highways from falling apart, and that's WITH subsidies from the rest of the country. California has excellent highways.
Re:California wants to split off (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, California gets less back from the federal government then we pay out. We would be in much better financial shape if we didn't have to subsidize other states.
This infographic says that California gets back 78 cents of every dollar paid to the federal government. Only 7 states have a lower ratio.
http://visualizingeconomics.com/2010/02/17/federal-taxes-paidreceived-for-each-state/ [visualizingeconomics.com]
Re: (Score:3)
What if all the middle class moved out
Both of them?
Predictions... (Score:5, Interesting)
50 years ago, they were predicting flying cars, space travel, holographic TVs, etc by y2k but few of the things they predicted came true, and even of those that did most of them are not accessible to Joe Average. However, look at the one big thing most of them missed: The Internet and the consumer microcomputer revolution.
Predicting the somewhat distant future is great and all, but I'm sure there will be something huge that we never see coming and once it's there, we'll wonder how we ever lived without it.
Re:Predictions... (Score:4, Funny)
My predications. (Score:5, Funny)
Prediction 2 : Don't care. See prediction 1.
Re:My predications. (Score:5, Funny)
You will care. Oh how you will care.
We know one thing for sure. (Score:5, Interesting)
That there will be an ironic post about 20 top predictions from 100 years prior and snarky commentators will smugly wonder how we took any of this seriously.
Re:We know one thing for sure. (Score:4, Insightful)
So come on /., put forth YOUR predictions! (Score:5, Insightful)
I predict there will be unrest in the middle east.
Re:So come on /., put forth YOUR predictions! (Score:4, Funny)
One currency? Bad idea even if possible. (Score:4, Insightful)
Research "Optimal Currency Area". Try to have a single currency across a heterogeneous region, and you get a train wreck like the Euro.
People aren't going to give up their native languages, either.
Still Waiting... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
The worst predictions IMO (Score:5, Interesting)
Seriously? We have so much widespread extremism in the world that you probably couldn't get a majority of countries to agree that milk is white, and they think this'll get done in a measly 90 years?
"12. California will lead the break-up of the US (Dev 2) (Likelihood 8/10)"
The US has survived a civil war, a depression that makes this recession look like good times, corporate tyranny that even today seems unthinkable, they have the balls to call this that likely? Look, I'm not saying it can't happen -- it definitely can. But given how (increasingly) inter-dependent and weak the states are (compared to federal gov't powers), this prediction is brave to say the least.
"13. Space elevators will make space travel cheap and easy (Ahdok) (Likelihood 8/10)"
To be fair he says it won't be so cheap that the average person can afford it, but I think even suggesting that it could be done within 100 years is again brave. There are just so many obstacles that need to be overcome to make this happen; it could even turn out to be theoretically impossible to create materials that would be necessary.
"16. Deserts will become tropical forests (jim300) (Likelihood 7/10)"
More like 1/10. Where's the water coming from? Barring a breakthrough in energy tech that would allow us to cheaply distill sea water, it's never gonna happen (read: it's never gonna happen). The trend today is pretty much the opposite, and I don't see that trend reversing anytime soon in light of increasingly aggressive farming practices and global warming.
I'd love to be wrong though.
Re:The worst predictions IMO (Score:4, Interesting)
The US has survived ... a depression that makes this recession look like good times
Check your numbers... the current depression has much worse numbers across the board than the G.D. Crazy, but true. The only numbers that are better are the numbers that are no longer comparable due to redefinition, such as endless redefinition of the unemployment rate, etc.
"Young People", defined as not living in the nursing home, have this strange idea that America in the 30s was as bad as Germany in the late 20s or late 40s, or Argentina for the past... century it seems. The GD just wasn't that bad, in fact in many ways, it was much better than now. Yes 1/4 of the population was un/under employed, just like now. Yes lots of people lost their homes, just like now. Yes excessive debt destroyed uncountable companies, just like now. Yes millions could not afford food and went to soup kitchens, just like now except we use technology and send them to super-walmart with EBT cards or whatever they're called. Yes we lost a lot of farmland and manufacturing jobs, but not as much as now. Yes fascism and quisling-ism was spreading, just like now. Yes plenty of blaming troubles on immigrants and minorities, just like now. Yes plenty of warmongering to jumpstart the economy, just like now.
For political reasons we can not admit it, but history will look back on this era as the second great depression.
Re:The worst predictions IMO (Score:4, Interesting)
I think you're underestimating the importance of the social safety net that was created after (and as a result of) the Great Depression: "In 1940, 40% of draftees were rejected, most of them because of malnutrition, bad teeth and eyesight--all results of the Depression." [museumofworldwarii.com]
Let that sink in for a minute.
It's easy to complain about the debt incurred in the government's response to this recession. Our ancestors already witnessed the alternative. It was horrendous.
Re: (Score:3)
malnutrition due to corn intake leading to obesity is another form of malnutrition also reaching epidemic proportions.
Death by corn just takes longer than death by starvation.
Re:The worst predictions IMO (Score:5, Interesting)
Hard to admit- but I think in delta quality of life, the Great Recession has been WORSE. It's one thing to go from living in a sod house suffering from dust related tuberculosis to wandering the country sleeping in your car (Grapes of Wrath). It's quite another thing entirely to go from a 4000 square foot McMansion with six TV sets and air conditioning and central heating, to wandering your neighborhood sleeping in your car, to losing the car when you can no longer afford gas for it and your neighbors have it towed as an eyesore.
I work on the board of directors for an organization serving the homeless- and our volunteers report the streets are getting MEAN from the anger- to the point of homeless people beating each other up over not having cigarettes.
Re:The worst predictions IMO (Score:4, Informative)
More so as of late though- and according to my friend Barb, who walks the streets of Portland, Oregon twice a day- it's the newcomers, particularly the young, who are the angriest. Makes sense though- you had an ambitious father and mother who provided a fancy home and all the toys you could want, then they get foreclosed on and your entire family ends up on the street, your sense of entitlement is going to hit reality awfully hard and you're going to be a threat to society.
I know the answer to that (Score:3, Insightful)
Hundred years from know futurulogist will write books predicting the same things as those in the article are "just around the corner" and will be available in less than another 100 years.
Obvious One... (Score:5, Funny)
100 years from now, Linux will be 5 years from taking over the desktop.
myke
+100 and the exponential bias (Score:5, Insightful)
- in the eighties AIDS was said to be cured by 2000
- in the seventies nuclear plants were created, expecting all the technical uncertainties to be solved by 2000
not mentioning studies, novels, sci-fi movies that made an unsuccessful attempt to describe a world in a 30~50 years future
And they want to predict the world in 100 years from now?
Re:+100 and the exponential bias (Score:5, Insightful)
Retrospectively,
- in the eighties AIDS was said to be cured by 2000
Is that all so far from the truth? The outlook at that time was a global pandemic across all people, spread thru hospital blood transfusions, medical and dental treatments, maybe swimming pool water... Looking at the stats, now its sort of a chronic lifestyle disease of certain subcultures, like smoking, sorta.
From my personal perspective, in my social subculture, its basically cured by lack of transmission, and is not relevant for fearmongering or FUD.
Its probably going to end up "controlled" like malaria or TB rather than apparent utter eradication like smallpox, but for all practical purposes, its no longer a threat.
Re:+100 and the exponential bias (Score:4, Insightful)
Even there, among certain subcultures (cough, Catholics) the transmission rate is at or near zero. Eventually, the other subcultures, haven proven themselves unable to survive, won't.
Its interesting how on an individual basis we've tried to halt evolution and don't allow individual euthanasia. But on a cultural / subcultural level, if they as a group wanna fail, or self destruct themselves, we pretty much sit back and let them.
...a more likely scenario (Score:4, Insightful)
- The divide between the wealthy and the poor continues to grow. Globally, the middle-class is virtually non-existent. Most of the world lives just above a subsistence level.
- Biodiversity reaches an unprecedented minimum. Between over harvesting and habitat destruction, whole ecosystems have disappeared from the earth. People debate whether many of the large land mammal species ever actually existed or if they were part of a mythology.
- Petroleum is unquestionably depleted and too expensive for use other than by the military and the extremely wealthy.
- War continues as we fight over the dwindling remains of our natural resources.
- Welcome to the surveillance state.
- World population continues to increase, although at slower rates due to famine, disease and widespread war.
- The US has virtually no national transportation infrastructure since the social and political will never appeared to move away from the automobile before before gasoline prices and the maintenance of our roads became financially untenable.
- global warming continues with unimaginable impacts on coastal regions.
- chaos is the only predictable quality of life.
- No Linux on the desktop and the desktop computer itself will be an antiquated notion.
I wish I could jump on board with the techo-fantasies but I don't think that's where we are going - at least not for the majority. Now I'm depressed...
100 years from now... (Score:5, Interesting)
Sleepwalking to destruction. (Score:5, Insightful)
What would such a thing need us for?
What is even more disturbing is that the exponential trend identified by Moore can be found in completely unrelated economic figures, energy use figures, patent volume figures, and many more.
Humans seem destined to ride an exponential wave, and not to notice until it's too late.
And all the while, the Fermi paradox waits before us like a dark chasm.
To compare, check out 1900. (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.yorktownhistory.org/homepages/1900_predictions.htm [yorktownhistory.org]
Some spot on. Others... not so much.
Breakup of the USA Versus Reality (Score:3)
The breakup of the USA explicitly implies a new Civil War, hardly possible considering the heavy balance of military power in favor of Empire. The Powers That Be would rather slaughter 9/10th of the civilian population, more in keeping with the advance of the eugenics programs envisioned by the New World Order. "Hope and change you can believe in" has left the building, with a Unitary Executive even more powerful under Obama than existed under Bush the Lessor.
The future doesn't so much repeat the past as it does rhyme with it. Prognostications of the future 100 years hence tracks more closely with the dystopian science fiction novel by George Orwell's "1984". "If you want to know what the future holds for humankind, imagine a boot stomping a human face, forever."
War is Peace.
Freedom is Slavery.
Ignorance is Strength.
Look at the history of predictions for precedent (Score:4, Interesting)
In 1900 some predictions were made by "most learned and conservative minds in America" about what life would be like in 100 years. Now that it's a decade past that deadline, let's take a look at how they fared:
http://www.yorktownhistory.org/homepages/1900_predictions.htm [yorktownhistory.org]
Interestingly, they got some of them right. But these were mostly about the spread of technology that already existed at the consumer level, and all good futurists know that predicting price drops in manufactured conveniences is usually a safe bet.
Some of my favorites (with a few of my comments):
- Gymnastics will begin in the nursery, where toys and games will be designed to strengthen the muscles. A man or woman unable to walk ten miles at a stretch will be regarded as a weakling. (Ha!) ...coal will have become more and more expensive. Man will have found electricity manufactured by waterpower to be much cheaper. Every river or creek with any suitable fall will be ... making electricity.
- There Will Be No Street Cars in Our Large Cities. All hurry traffic will be below or high above ground when brought within city limits. In most cities it will be confined to broad subways or tunnels, well lighted and well ventilated, or to high trestles with “moving-sidewalk” stairways leading to the top. These underground or overhead streets will teem with capacious automobile passenger coaches and freight with cushioned wheels. Subways or trestles will be reserved for express trains. Cities, therefore, will be free from all noises. (Ha!)
- No Mosquitoes nor Flies. Insect screens will be unnecessary. Mosquitoes, house-flies and roaches will have been practically exterminated. Boards of health will have destroyed all mosquito haunts and breeding-grounds, drained all stagnant pools, filled in all swamp-lands, and chemically treated all still-water streams.
- Strawberries as Large as Apples will be eaten by our great-great-grandchildren for their Christmas dinners a hundred years hence. One cantaloupe will supply an entire family. Melons, cherries, grapes, plums, apples, pears, peaches and all berries will be seedless.
- There will be No C, X or Q in our every-day alphabet. They will be abandoned because unnecessary. Spelling by sound will have been adopted, first by the newspapers. English will be a language of condensed words expressing condensed ideas, and will be more extensively spoken than any other. Russian will rank second.
-
- Hot and Cold Air from Spigots. Hot or cold air will be turned on from spigots to regulate the temperature of a house as we now turn on hot or cold water from spigots to regulate the temperature of the bath. Central plants will supply this cool air and heat to city houses in the same way as now our gas or electricity is furnished. Rising early to build the furnace fire will be a task of the olden times. Homes will have no chimneys, because no smoke will be created within their walls. (They sort of got the end result right, but not the means)
- Vegetables Grown by Electricity. In cold weather he will place heat-conducting electric wires under the soil of his garden and thus warm his growing plants. Electric currents applied to the soil will make valuable plants grow larger and faster, and will kill troublesome weeds.
- Few drugs will be swallowed or taken into the stomach unless needed for the direct treatment of that organ itself. Drugs needed by the lungs, for instance, will be applied directly to those organs through the skin and flesh. They will be carried with the electric current applied without pain to the outside skin of the body.
- There will be no wild animals except in menageries. Rats and mice will have been exterminated.
- To England in Two Days. Fast electric ships, crossing the ocean at more than a mile a minute, will go from New York to Liverpool in two days.
Prophets always make the same predictions: we'll have better versions of
Dark future (Score:4, Interesting)
A hundred years from now,
If things don't blow up, most people will live in conditions we consider to be poverty with regard to food, water usage, and vacation today.
However, there will be a lot of electronic entertainment and it's possible that via direct input to the brain we'll have the experience of great vacations and fine food which would mitigate that.
We'll have so many people crammed on the planet that a decent lifestyle will be impossible unless we find a way to directly manufacture food from energy.
If things do blow up...
We'll be mostly dead from bio warfare
Or actual warfare disrupting food transportation resulting in the death of billions.
Or a small scale nuclear war with similar effects.
Or a mass dieoff when the oceans finish collapsing, some kind of virus kills our monoculture crops, and we just can't produce enough food and distribute enough water to keep things going.
And it's increasingly likely the future will be as predicted in the 50's. An eternity of the boot of the rulers on the face of humanity without end as the weapons become good enough and the social control systems become effective enough that revolution is no longer possible.
hell (Score:2)
can you say that you can go to space, elevators and private space industry, space colonies etc, in such an environment ? and dont get me started on the whole patent thing.
Re:We'll go nowhere at this rate. (Score:5, Insightful)
30 years ago all sorts of stuff was being predicted. space colonies this that. all we ended up has been a widening income/wealth inequality with those amassing wealth doing nothing with that wealth but letting it amass more wealth sitting in the banks. there is no way in hell we will have space elevators, this that, as long as the rich can make more money without making anything. why invest in a space elevator, why you can just let the money sit in hedge funds and let it become more money overnight, without considerable risk ... the only ones who will do these would be new internet-era entrepreneurs and rich boys like the ones who are investing in space x thingies etc now. and no way in hell their numbers and wealth can make these stuff come true in a way that would matter for the public.
You have such a deep misunderstanding of the real world, I'm surprised you can manage to get food into your mouth to survive. The article summary seems to have triggered your "I AM THE 99%" response. However you don't seem to understand the nature of wealth. People like you sit back and complain that the rich have all their money in the bank, so there isn't any left for you. The reality is that weathy people invest their money to remain wealthy. What the hell do you think a hedge fund is? Like most investments, it puts the money to work.
If a space elevator could ever be made profitably, those kinds of funds are the ones that would invest. Poor, aimless, unmotivated fools will never make it happen. No such venture was ever done for charity. Columbus was sponsored by the Portuguese crown in a search for wealth in trade routes. The Apollo program was sponsored by the USA so as to not fall behind in the USSR and risk the cold war. A space elevator represents a huge opportunity for wealth generation. You don't think greed would make it happen if it was possible? You're just plain wrong.
-d
Re: (Score:3)
Columbus was sponsored by the Portuguese crown in a search for wealth in trade routes.
You might want to revisit the history books on this one...
Columbus was sponsored by Queen Isabella of Spain. There were several reasons for this sponsorship, though Columbus's personal wealth and power certainly came into play. At the time, the Ottomans and other Islamic nations controlled the trade routes to the east. Europe wanted the spices and medicines available in China. One of the hopeful outcomes was an allegiance with Murtada Khan of the Golden Horde. Murtada had expressed an interest in Christia
Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:We'll go nowhere at this rate. (Score:4, Interesting)
Exactly. Building a space elevator, while I'm certain is completely possible from a technical point-of-view, would require an enormous amount of money, and it'd be a while before any profits are realized. Investors are very short-sighted; if they can't realize a profit in 3-5 years, then they have no interest.
Re: (Score:3)
Precisely, my good man! The automobile is nothing but a play thing for the rich, and such a foray shall never result in an improvement of the technology, nor greater economies of scale, nor any other positive externality.
Re: (Score:3)
https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=high+frequency+trading [google.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Sure, space elevators would enable huge profits, but the risk is too large and the cost of investment astronomical (pun intended) for a private entity.
There's much safer investments here on earth for the 1%
John Galt and his innovations only exist in the fevered imagination of randians...
Re: (Score:3)
It sits in giant vaults so Uncle Scrooge can swim in the coins.
Re:We'll go nowhere at this rate. (Score:4, Informative)
Just because someone holds a position for a second doesn't mean the money is not at risk and has not left the fund.
Further hedge funds and high frequency trading rarely coincide. Money must be invested to earn returns. HFT doesn't change that.
You clearly _don't_ understand and should stop embarrassing yourself until you learn some things.
Re:California Secede? Unlikely (Score:5, Interesting)
Texas isn't going anywhere, either.
People who want to get elected in Texas use that to cadge votes, because it works, but once they find out you can't defend a nation with a posse carrying six-guns any more and the amount it will raise their taxes to become a real military power with a full Army, Air Force, Coast Guard (370 miles of coastline in the smugglingest water in America), and Border Patrol (1250 miles of border with Mexico, over 60% of the whole border; plus 1400 miles with New Mexico, Okalahoma, Arkansas, and Louisiana). Duplicating the rest of the functions of the federal government won't be a cakewalk, either, and don't pretend they'll just let that all fall flat. Economies of scale mean that being a part of the entire nation is cheaper than going it alone. And Texas' physical scale makes it more expensive to administer, not less. Throw in the added expense of commerce across borders, and no protections against tarriffs from the commerce clause, and businesses in the state doing any business out of state will be crippled.
And Texas is hardly monolithic. Split it off from the U.S. and the next thing that happens is that West Texas will insist on separating entirely from East Texas, and East Texas would be just fine with that. So there's only so far the political fixers in the state are willing to take the issue beyond claptrap at campaign rallies.
It's theater, nothing more.
Re:Breakup of the US - HIGHLY Unlikely (Score:4, Insightful)
This is all based on the assumption that what is today, will continue forever, which is wrong.
California, which is the economic engine of the USA
As the acceleration of jobs leaving for China and India increase.... What is CA once the last manufacturing job moves to China and the last info/tech job moves to India? Well, they have a lot of farms, and ...um...
I'd like to point out too that California basically feeds the USA as well. Their agricultural output is vast.
Hmm thats a slight exaggeration, probably because they produce a bit more than, say, Nevada, or New Mexico, but ...
Once the aquifer dries up, wait for the next big drought so the rivers run dry, and that's the end of that. Which is not so bad, because you can rely on the vibrant factories and office buildings full of programmers, err, wait see above.
Sure, some big cities full of people. What happens when the big earthquake hits? Hmm. Well when a big hurricane hit N.O., we abandoned them and its still in a tailspin at a fraction its current size. After the cities in CA are perma-depopulated, what next?
There's no reason to conclude that the US wouldn't just simply use military force to preserve the union
What if "we" wanted to get rid of CA? You're assuming only a healthy vibrant state can/could exist. Imagine straight line extrapolation of no more agriculture, no more industry, no more people in the cities after the earthquake, everyone who can move, has left ... We've bought land from other countries, who's to say we wouldn't sell CA to MX for barrels of oil? Or a 99 year lease agreement? Imagine a piece of land with no realistic future economic value mostly populated by citizens from a neighboring country, you need something from that neighboring country, they offer up a "lease" or "trade" or something like that, secession doesn't have to be violence from outside the power structure, it probably will be from within the power structure. Maybe we'll make a treaty that CA and the SW is "NAFTA-land" in general and a new province of .mx in practice, legally technically remains our land, outsource management of everything outside our .mil bases to .mx, in exchange we get first dibs on whatever oil they have left. I could see that happening. Not a shot would be fired, just a bunch of treaties and trade agreements...
100 years from now for all practical purposes we'll have just as many languages with over 100,000 speakers as we do today.
And COBOL programmers will still be in demand. No I'm not kidding.