We will soon be able to meet and exceed the basic needs of every man, woman and child on the planet. Abundance for all is within our grasp. This bold, contrarian view, backed up by exhaustive research, introduces our near-term future, where exponentially growing technologies and three other powerful forces are conspiring to better the lives of billions. An antidote to pessimism by tech entrepreneur turned philanthropist, Peter H. Diamandis and award-winning science writer Steven Kotler.
Since the dawn of humanity, a privileged few have lived in stark contrast to the hardscrabble majority. Conventional wisdom says this gap cannot be closed. But it is closing—fast. The authors document how four forces—exponential technologies, the DIY innovator, the Technophilanthropist, and the Rising Billion—are conspiring to solve our biggest problems. Abundance establishes hard targets for change and lays out a strategic roadmap for governments, industry and entrepreneurs, giving us plenty of reason for optimism.
Examining human need by category—water, food, energy, healthcare, education, freedom—Diamandis and Kotler introduce dozens of innovators making great strides in each area: Larry Page, Steven Hawking, Dean Kamen, Daniel Kahneman, Elon Musk, Bill Joy, Stewart Brand, Jeff Skoll, Ray Kurzweil, Ratan Tata, Craig Venter, among many, many others.
He argues that there are many types of technologies being developed atm that will solve a lot of the current problems we're facing. Think about the problem of horse manure in cities that was solved with cars. So far I've read about how nanotechnology can be used to filter bacteria, virus and arsenic from water to provide clean water cheaply, reducing health problems and deaths, increasing productivity, and decreasing fertility rates (since there's a correlation between health and fertility rates).
Vertical farming (growing food in buildings) increasing yield per hectare and reducing transportation costs (since we can grow plants nearer cities)
We will soon be able to meet and exceed the basic needs of every man, woman and child on the planet. Abundance for all is within our grasp. This bold, contrarian view, backed up by exhaustive research, introduces our near-term future, where exponentially growing technologies and three other powerful forces are conspiring to better the lives of billions. An antidote to pessimism by tech entrepreneur turned philanthropist, Peter H. Diamandis and award-winning science writer Steven Kotler.
Since the dawn of humanity, a privileged few have lived in stark contrast to the hardscrabble majority. Conventional wisdom says this gap cannot be closed. But it is closing—fast. The authors document how four forces—exponential technologies, the DIY innovator, the Technophilanthropist, and the Rising Billion—are conspiring to solve our biggest problems. Abundance establishes hard targets for change and lays out a strategic roadmap for governments, industry and entrepreneurs, giving us plenty of reason for optimism.
Examining human need by category—water, food, energy, healthcare, education, freedom—Diamandis and Kotler introduce dozens of innovators making great strides in each area: Larry Page, Steven Hawking, Dean Kamen, Daniel Kahneman, Elon Musk, Bill Joy, Stewart Brand, Jeff Skoll, Ray Kurzweil, Ratan Tata, Craig Venter, among many, many others.
He argues that there are many types of technologies being developed atm that will solve a lot of the current problems we're facing. Think about the problem of horse manure in cities that was solved with cars. So far I've read about how nanotechnology can be used to filter bacteria, virus and arsenic from water to provide clean water cheaply, reducing health problems and deaths, increasing productivity, and decreasing fertility rates (since there's a correlation between health and fertility rates).
Vertical farming (growing food in buildings) increasing yield per hectare and reducing transportation costs (since we can grow plants nearer cities)
Answering from a western / central European perspective:
On May 06 2014 22:01 urboss wrote: How do you think the world will look like in 2050?
Will women reach equality? Will we still be dating in the real world? How will partners find each other? Will there still be sex?
Women will most likely not reach complete equality (maybe never), however we can expect things to progress further. The differences will most likely be measurable only in jobs in terms of pay and the type of employment women are found in. However I do believe the effect will be significantly less than it is today. Dating will look similar to what it does today, but will be significantly aided by technology. Think of dating algorithms performing in real time during a conversation happens. You might have a wearable device that answers "should I kiss her?" for you as the conversation happens. Software will tell you another person is a likely match just from sensory data and analyzing conversation. There will be still sex, but I believe there will be less. Human communication will in general get more sterile and less physical. We see some of the effects already today: I am thinking somewhat along the lines of this article http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/20/young-people-japan-stopped-having-sex
Will there be a major change in our economic system? Will the majority of people still be working? Will there still be poverty?
There won't be major revolutionary changes, but there will be a progression along the lines we are already observing today: A significant increase in inequality of wealth, and jobs being cut / downgraded in favor of automation. The effect will be that the majority will indeed still be working, but in general real wages will be stagnating or declining. You could argue that there will be more poverty in the future going simply by percentile of income, however the poor of 2050 will be able to afford more luxuries too. Just as someone in poverty owns a smartphone today, the essential technological luxuries (say, computer aided dating mentioned before) will be affordable to the poor as well.
On May 06 2014 22:01 urboss wrote: How do you think the world will look like in 2050?
Will women reach equality? Will we still be dating in the real world? How will partners find each other? Will there still be sex?
Women will most likely not reach complete equality (maybe never), however we can expect things to progress further. The differences will most likely be measurable only in jobs in terms of pay and the type of employment women are found in. However I do believe the effect will be significantly less than it is today. Dating will look similar to what it does today, but will be significantly aided by technology. Think of dating algorithms performing in real time during a conversation happens. You might have a wearable device that answers "should I kiss her?" for you as the conversation happens. Software will tell you another person is a likely match just from sensory data and analyzing conversation. There will be still sex, but I believe there will be less. Human communication will in general get more sterile and less physical. We see some of the effects already today: I am thinking somewhat along the lines of this article http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/20/young-people-japan-stopped-having-sex
Will there be a major change in our economic system? Will the majority of people still be working? Will there still be poverty?
There won't be major revolutionary changes, but there will be a progression along the lines we are already observing today: A significant increase in inequality of wealth, and jobs being cut / downgraded in favor of automation. The effect will be that the majority will indeed still be working, but in general real wages will be stagnating or declining. You could argue that there will be more poverty in the future going simply by percentile of income, however the poor of 2050 will be able to afford more luxuries too. Just as someone in poverty owns a smartphone today, the essential technological luxuries (say, computer aided dating mentioned before) will be affordable to the poor as well.
That's already the case actually. The all too often quoted statistic that women make 80% of what men make is based on net values for the whole population. It doesn't look within individual careers. So it misses the fact that women haven't been a part of some of these careers that long, don't have as much seniority, and therefore are payed less. If you compare instead with this fact in mind, the numbers come out much closer, to the point where you could argue the differences aren't statistically significant.
On May 06 2014 22:01 urboss wrote: How do you think the world will look like in 2050?
Will women reach equality? Will we still be dating in the real world? How will partners find each other? Will there still be sex?
Women will most likely not reach complete equality (maybe never), however we can expect things to progress further. The differences will most likely be measurable only in jobs in terms of pay and the type of employment women are found in. However I do believe the effect will be significantly less than it is today. Dating will look similar to what it does today, but will be significantly aided by technology. Think of dating algorithms performing in real time during a conversation happens. You might have a wearable device that answers "should I kiss her?" for you as the conversation happens. Software will tell you another person is a likely match just from sensory data and analyzing conversation. There will be still sex, but I believe there will be less. Human communication will in general get more sterile and less physical. We see some of the effects already today: I am thinking somewhat along the lines of this article http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/20/young-people-japan-stopped-having-sex
Will there be a major change in our economic system? Will the majority of people still be working? Will there still be poverty?
There won't be major revolutionary changes, but there will be a progression along the lines we are already observing today: A significant increase in inequality of wealth, and jobs being cut / downgraded in favor of automation. The effect will be that the majority will indeed still be working, but in general real wages will be stagnating or declining. You could argue that there will be more poverty in the future going simply by percentile of income, however the poor of 2050 will be able to afford more luxuries too. Just as someone in poverty owns a smartphone today, the essential technological luxuries (say, computer aided dating mentioned before) will be affordable to the poor as well.
Care to elaborate? If women are being paid equally and are employed in equally prestigious positions, why would the cultural views of women not shift along with those factors? What prevents women from ever being treated equally?
On May 07 2014 23:53 zatic wrote: Answering from a western / central European perspective:
On May 06 2014 22:01 urboss wrote: How do you think the world will look like in 2050?
Will women reach equality? Will we still be dating in the real world? How will partners find each other? Will there still be sex?
Women will most likely not reach complete equality (maybe never), however we can expect things to progress further. The differences will most likely be measurable only in jobs in terms of pay and the type of employment women are found in. However I do believe the effect will be significantly less than it is today. Dating will look similar to what it does today, but will be significantly aided by technology. Think of dating algorithms performing in real time during a conversation happens. You might have a wearable device that answers "should I kiss her?" for you as the conversation happens. Software will tell you another person is a likely match just from sensory data and analyzing conversation. There will be still sex, but I believe there will be less. Human communication will in general get more sterile and less physical. We see some of the effects already today: I am thinking somewhat along the lines of this article http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/20/young-people-japan-stopped-having-sex
Will there be a major change in our economic system? Will the majority of people still be working? Will there still be poverty?
There won't be major revolutionary changes, but there will be a progression along the lines we are already observing today: A significant increase in inequality of wealth, and jobs being cut / downgraded in favor of automation. The effect will be that the majority will indeed still be working, but in general real wages will be stagnating or declining. You could argue that there will be more poverty in the future going simply by percentile of income, however the poor of 2050 will be able to afford more luxuries too. Just as someone in poverty owns a smartphone today, the essential technological luxuries (say, computer aided dating mentioned before) will be affordable to the poor as well.
Care to elaborate? If women are being paid equally and are employed in equally prestigious positions, why would the cultural views of women not shift along with those factors? What prevents women from ever being treated equally?
I guess I don't really know, except for: Why hasn't it happen yet? In theory, the ingredients are already there, but the process just goes much, much slower than anticipated. I might be influenced in my rather negative outlook because Germany is especially bad when it comes to equality in the workplace. But browse any thread in this forum where feminism and equality is discussed and you will be discouraged from thinking the male generation growing up currently (90% of TLs audience) is any better than the one that failed to make equality happen in the present. I know that is not exactly a scientific metric but it is definitely part of where my pessimistic view comes from.
Edit: maybe I wasn't clear in my original post, I am arguing that women will still be NOT payed equally and still won't the same jobs men do, despite almost complete social acceptance of equality.
How do you think the world will look like in 2050?
Will there be major wars until then or will the world drift toward peace? There won't be a war such as WW1&2, but a second cold war might. Also more middle-eastern countries might go into revolutions, and perhaps more of those wars on terorism. Will democracies prevail? True democracy no, What we call democracy probaby. Will there be a new world power? No, the current powers such as the EU, US, russia and china will evolve.
Will global warming and overpopulation finally show their effects? yeah, and will cause problems, though i think global warming will slowly start be not that big of a factor. overpopulation will be the major issue. Will we have found efficient ways of creating renewable energy? I think (and hope) we will have.
How will we be communicating with each other? through services such as facebook(for general/indirect communication) and whatsapp(for direct and personal/specific group communication) Will there still be Facebook and Twitter around? Facebook yes, twitter no. Will people still be having a social life in the real world? Yes, explained in the book "physics of the future" by michio kaku. What are people going to do in their spare time? Gaming, socializing, laughing at cat pictures and watching series/movies, pretty much what we internet folk do but it has become more mainstream.
Are new forms of art and entertainment going to emerge? things such as small gardens and rooms. through VR. Is the music going to sound different? Probably. Will YouTube beat television? Not YouTube persee, more netflix. How might future games look like? VR.
Will there be a robot in every household? Not the robot with arms and legs, but "smart" furniture/household items. Maybe even integrated into walls of homes. Is there finally going to be a robot that cooks for me and cleans up afterwards? It wont be a robot doing it. Think of microwave food, but better and more healthy.
Are we still going to have Smartphones? Wearables? Google Glass? Smart contact lenses, maybe not quite yet but that is the direction we are going. Is everyone going to have chip implants? Not we, but everything we use. Will computers become more powerful? That would seem logical. Will Moore's law still be in place in 2050? Nope, See this video.
How will the Internet look like? Internet sites will be flowing into each other so that it almost seems as 1 big internet site. Will it still be possible to live completely offline? Yeah, don't see why not. Will governments take over the Internet? No, we wouldn't let that happen.
Will there be new ways of transportation? More hover trains. Will the electric car take over the traditional car? Yeah, though i do not know it cars will still be a big thing. How will technology enable new ways of warfare? It will not be a war of numbers of troops but of information Will there be wars at all? There will always be in one shape or another.
Will women reach equality? Not true equality, that will not happen for the forseeable future. though we will be more so. Will we still be dating in the real world? Yes, once again "physics of the future" by michio kaku. How will partners find each other? Dating sites or just happening to meet in "normal" ways Will there still be sex? Ofcourse.
How many times will the stock markets crash until 2050? One, maybe two times. Will there be a major change in our economic system? Yes, the hyper capitalism will vanish and make room for a less extreme version of capitalism or a more socialistic system. Will the majority of people still be working? Yes, we wont be that far that this won't be a thing anymore, though probably the middle class/upper class will work less. Will there still be poverty? Yes, we would say that they don't have it to bad, but there will for the forseeable future be poverty.
Will we finally be able to treat diseases without side effects? Not completly without, but with less. Is there going to be a major breakthrough in the sciences? Yes, probably in genetics and genetic modification.
What will be the new threats to mankind? Perhaps, but we will still be our own biggest threat Will we be able to colonize other planets by 2050? Not yet, have patience young padawan.
Anyone interested in this subject should read "physics of the future" by michio kaku.
Personally I truly think that humans are really mean by nature, well I don't say that myself but humans in general, if everything about them were known would be shown as bastards, egoists and opportunists. I think that there will be inevitably two ways for humanity that will be reach in a short to long time: -the unlikely one, with the rising power of China and Russia which are dictatorships, revolutions could happen there and it could really shake the global economy depending if it's long or not, soft or not; if the global economy falls, civil wars could follow in most countries of the world; during that distress, opportunists would try to cause more chaos (anarchists, Islamists, degrowthists, terrorists of all kinds but also activists of all kind); the climate change and its consequences, and the lack of energies, could worsen and perhaps be the trigger to the civil wars; basically humanity would go almost instinct because everything that I said would cause wars; anyway it's pretty unlikely. -the most likely one, we manage to have a federation of Earth, personally I can see it in 500-1000 yrs, perhaps we will see the full federalization of Europe; we will continue into a society of greener consumption and without wars, hobbies (especially violent ones) will have a greater importance; the federation of earth will try to explore the universe and exploit its resources and imo that will be natural; I could not see a federation of Earth or even any important organisations without any goal other than keeping peace; most things used with paper in dailylife will be controlled by programs themselves strictly controlled by the government to the extreme (computing will be rly, rly important and advanced level right now will be common knowledge in the future and there will be different specializations for different programs etc...); I totally see us as colonizers of the universe and perhaps making wars for it in the long future because I can't see an united humanity without a grand objective.
Now in 50 yrs on a political level, I can see a revolution happen in China but most likely a gentle transition, even if it's very hard to predict. The EU becomes more of a federation and becomes near self reliant with green energies. There will inevitably be political troubles in Russia because one day or the other Putin will die. In Africa and Middle East, Lybia, Irak, Afghanistan, Somalia are sure to stay in the shit and stay as zone without any right (except with an intervention from either the US, China, India or Russia but not likely). Africa will see some country rly developp, have investments and form stronger ties while others will stay poor. The Mercosur will expand to all the South American states and some of Central and Caribbean but not every and also become more of a federation. ASEAN will also expand in the south-east and perhaps include Australia. I don't see anything happening in the Koreas, North Korea is still there for awhile (perhaps if the economy situation rly worsen something might change?). Japan will have big reforms on a constitutional level that will drastically change the country (it's an institutionally racist country that faces the biggest demography crisis of human history) with many dissidents. I have no clue about fiscal paradises and countries exporting oil, too hard to predict.
On a social level, English will be known by more and more people as second language as education develops. French will most likely become the fourth language spoken at birth behind in order Indian, Chinese and English. More and more people will become atheists (or agnostics) and religion will have significantly less power, a direct consequence will be a better acceptation of gays, lesbians, and trans. Most developed countries will see the rise of greener practices, with less emphasis on consumption and a return of traditional values while developing countries (with developing middle class) will see a boom of consumerism and will be the main targets of global companies. As I said earlier computing will become more important and will be taught to everybody in the near future while specialization in computing will develop. More things in our daily life will be automatized than now in 2050. I don't rly see our practices change much but the ones of developing countries yes with more individualism like in our countries. Concerning plastic surgery, drugs and alcohol usage, surrogacy and "artificial" births, it will be rly heterogeneous on a global scale (different for each country).
That was my long take at 2050, and I only did brief political and social parts.
We will soon be able to meet and exceed the basic needs of every man, woman and child on the planet. Abundance for all is within our grasp. This bold, contrarian view, backed up by exhaustive research, introduces our near-term future, where exponentially growing technologies and three other powerful forces are conspiring to better the lives of billions. An antidote to pessimism by tech entrepreneur turned philanthropist, Peter H. Diamandis and award-winning science writer Steven Kotler.
Since the dawn of humanity, a privileged few have lived in stark contrast to the hardscrabble majority. Conventional wisdom says this gap cannot be closed. But it is closing—fast. The authors document how four forces—exponential technologies, the DIY innovator, the Technophilanthropist, and the Rising Billion—are conspiring to solve our biggest problems. Abundance establishes hard targets for change and lays out a strategic roadmap for governments, industry and entrepreneurs, giving us plenty of reason for optimism.
Examining human need by category—water, food, energy, healthcare, education, freedom—Diamandis and Kotler introduce dozens of innovators making great strides in each area: Larry Page, Steven Hawking, Dean Kamen, Daniel Kahneman, Elon Musk, Bill Joy, Stewart Brand, Jeff Skoll, Ray Kurzweil, Ratan Tata, Craig Venter, among many, many others.
He argues that there are many types of technologies being developed atm that will solve a lot of the current problems we're facing. Think about the problem of horse manure in cities that was solved with cars. So far I've read about how nanotechnology can be used to filter bacteria, virus and arsenic from water to provide clean water cheaply, reducing health problems and deaths, increasing productivity, and decreasing fertility rates (since there's a correlation between health and fertility rates).
Vertical farming (growing food in buildings) increasing yield per hectare and reducing transportation costs (since we can grow plants nearer cities)
Not to get off topic, but I'm not convinced that cars saved the environment from horse manure. Here is a good historical analysis of the situation.
It's hard to react when you've pasted a long article without even citing a few key points but I'll try. I welcome any corrections but atm I'm finding it to be completely ridiculous to the point of disbelief.
From Nautil.us: In short, the automobile didn’t arrive as an “environmental savior,” a solution to urban waste epitomized by horse manure in New York City streets. The poor horses, in fact, were only a small part of the problem. The car emerged with an orchestrated push by the auto industry, and its reign was paved by a rising demand for gasoline and government investment in highways, roads, and zoning regulations. Similarly it was a democratic drive, with legislation to follow, that gave us sanitation laws and cleaned up our streets.
Here is my breakdown of their argument:
1. Cars didn't save the city from horse manure because the horses were only a part of the problem: there are other sanitation problems like a lack of a municipal garbage collection.
The other sanitation problems aren't horse manure problems, so they are irrelevant to the affect of cars on horse manure.
It's like you're saying that you're not convinced that some hypothetical scientists who cured cancer really cured cancer because people also died from heart attacks.
2. Cars was made popular for commercial gain. (orchestrated push by the auto industry)
The intention behind it is irrelevant.
It's like you're saying that you're not convinced that the scientists who cured cancer really cured cancer because they did it to become famous.
3. The government invested in highways, roads, and zoning regulations.
The fact that there is additional support is also irrelavant. The US government also invested in schools, did they save the country from illiteracy?
It's like you're saying that you're not convinced that the scientists who cured cancer really cured cancer because the government invested heavily in it.
4. Legislatures and sanitation laws cleaned up our streets.
Once again, the fact that there is additional support is also irrelevant. No amount of legislation will completely clean up the streets if there were 200,000 horses running around.
Just look at what great work legislature did in eradicating crime in USA.
On May 07 2014 23:53 zatic wrote: Answering from a western / central European perspective:
On May 06 2014 22:01 urboss wrote: How do you think the world will look like in 2050?
Will women reach equality? Will we still be dating in the real world? How will partners find each other? Will there still be sex?
Women will most likely not reach complete equality (maybe never), however we can expect things to progress further. The differences will most likely be measurable only in jobs in terms of pay and the type of employment women are found in. However I do believe the effect will be significantly less than it is today. Dating will look similar to what it does today, but will be significantly aided by technology. Think of dating algorithms performing in real time during a conversation happens. You might have a wearable device that answers "should I kiss her?" for you as the conversation happens. Software will tell you another person is a likely match just from sensory data and analyzing conversation. There will be still sex, but I believe there will be less. Human communication will in general get more sterile and less physical. We see some of the effects already today: I am thinking somewhat along the lines of this article http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/20/young-people-japan-stopped-having-sex
Will there be a major change in our economic system? Will the majority of people still be working? Will there still be poverty?
There won't be major revolutionary changes, but there will be a progression along the lines we are already observing today: A significant increase in inequality of wealth, and jobs being cut / downgraded in favor of automation. The effect will be that the majority will indeed still be working, but in general real wages will be stagnating or declining. You could argue that there will be more poverty in the future going simply by percentile of income, however the poor of 2050 will be able to afford more luxuries too. Just as someone in poverty owns a smartphone today, the essential technological luxuries (say, computer aided dating mentioned before) will be affordable to the poor as well.
Care to elaborate? If women are being paid equally and are employed in equally prestigious positions, why would the cultural views of women not shift along with those factors? What prevents women from ever being treated equally?
I guess I don't really know, except for: Why hasn't it happen yet? In theory, the ingredients are already there, but the process just goes much, much slower than anticipated. I might be influenced in my rather negative outlook because Germany is especially bad when it comes to equality in the workplace. But browse any thread in this forum where feminism and equality is discussed and you will be discouraged from thinking the male generation growing up currently (90% of TLs audience) is any better than the one that failed to make equality happen in the present. I know that is not exactly a scientific metric but it is definitely part of where my pessimistic view comes from.
Edit: maybe I wasn't clear in my original post, I am arguing that women will still be NOT payed equally and still won't the same jobs men do, despite almost complete social acceptance of equality.
Thanks for the explanation. I think I misunderstood your original point, and I don't necessarily disagree. I do think that TL.net is probably a bad place to get a fair population sample for gender equality issues. I've personally found that practically all video game related websites primarily have a population of young, single men, many of whom are in some way slightly sexist. And that's not to say that I'm completely immune either.
But sorry to get off topic, and I don't want to derail this into a sexism thread discussion. Thanks for the clarification.
Hrm. My question is a simple one. Can humanity save humanity...from humanity? Dumbest question yes. But that answers most questions. For all technologies, there will be those who want to profit, and control it. A common fallacy in this thread is completely ignoring human greed and desire. Of course it's been addressed, but those with high hopes for the future need to reconsider.
Wars. You bet. Small ones very much so. Large world wars again? If resources and pollution is killing our planet. True democracy does not exist, current politics may evolve to suit generational needs. Or stagnate and get overthrown. New world power...hard to tell. If China corrupts it's living conditions any further, it may not have a place to live. That desert is not showing signs of slowing down erosion. Global warming is already showing it's effects, whether deniers or believers like it or not. Renewable energy...who knows.
I'd prefer to meet people up person to communicate, otaku neet that I am. Still nothing like person to person. Facebook and Twitter...maybe. Social life in the real world. Of course. Spare time? We'll see. New Entertainment? Perhaps.
Music will sound different, and perhaps also mix existing types. Who knows. Youtube is also a control freak. Future games. Hrm. Depends on tech and budgets. Robot? I'd think not. Not everyone can afford one, or find them viable. Majority? Maybe. Define a robot's functions. There will be tech evolution, but we'll see what "things" they come up with. Chip implants? Ghost in the shell? Brainjacked? Not the brightest idea. Computers will probably become more powerful. We'll see about moore's law.
Internet will probably not look like Tron. Of course we can live without internet. The government will always attempt to control something, happening in many countries, just happens we still have internet neutrality...for now. Poverty will always exist. Of course sex will exist.
Equality? A thing that is written on a piece of paper. In reality, not many people are willing or ready to play fair if it places them above someone else. New threats to mankind... more environmental disasters, and of course, man themselves.
Will there be major wars until then or will the world drift toward peace? Will democracies prevail? Will there be a new world power?
There will be wars. Democracies will prevail and their inherent faults will be obvious for all to see. Inverted totalitarianism might become an entrenched system. China will rise to become a world power. Don't know if it will become the world power.
Will global warming and overpopulation finally show their effects? Will we have found efficient ways of creating renewable energy?
Global warming and overpopulation are already showing their effects. Yes.
How will we be communicating with each other? Will there still be Facebook and Twitter around? Will people still be having a social life in the real world? What are people going to do in their spare time?
Talking and internet. Facsimiles, sure. Yes. There's no substitute for real life until virtual reality is perfected. Same things they're doing now.
Are new forms of art and entertainment going to emerge? Is the music going to sound different? Will YouTube beat television? How might future games look like?
Probably. That's the hardest thing to predict. Yes. Music always changes. The distinction between streaming and television will largely disappear. More like reality.
Will there be a robot in every household? Is there finally going to be a robot that cooks for me and cleans up afterwards?
No. Robots will be the privilege of the wealthy. If you have the money.
Are we still going to have Smartphones? Wearables? Google Glass? Is everyone going to have chip implants? Will computers become more powerful? Will Moore's law still be in place in 2050?
Don't know. No. Of course. Moore's law is an observation.
How will the Internet look like? Will it still be possible to live completely offline? Will governments take over the Internet?
More easily accessible, more responsive to people's needs. Yes. The internet is not reality. If they do, we're boned.
Will there be new ways of transportation? Will the electric car take over the traditional car?
New ways of transportation. Probably improved versions of what already exists. Only if it's worth buying.
How will technology enable new ways of warfare? Will there be wars at all?
We'll be able to conduct entire wars without sending soldiers. This is really bad news. Yes.
Will women reach equality? Will we still be dating in the real world? How will partners find each other? Will there still be sex?
No. Yes. In person, through social media, through dating organizations. Yes. It's way too good to pass up.
How many times will the stock markets crash until 2050? Will there be a major change in our economic system? Will the majority of people still be working? Will there still be poverty?
Once. From capitalist to something else? Definitions get fuzzy. Yes. Definitely.
Will we finally be able to treat diseases without side effects? Is there going to be a major breakthrough in the sciences?
No. Errr...probably in quantum physics?
What will be the new threats to mankind? Will we be able to colonize other planets by 2050?
Small-scale biological and technological warfare, general nihilism, mass media distorting people's views on everything as a deliberate tactic, the rise of inverted totalitarianism as the natural consequence of democracy without meaningful participation. No. It will take too many resources.
So, how do you think the year 2050 will look like? What will be vanished, that is common nowadays? What will be important changes that will affect our lives? What do you wish there would exist by 2050?
As good and bad as the current day. Albums, personal computers, television sets, stigma towards online education, wired internet connections. Breakthroughs in treating diseases, an overhaul in the entertainment industry, an overall increase in "mobile living", advanced AI making many professions obsolete, euthanasia gaining widespread acceptance, the internet becoming available to almost all people worldwide.
We will soon be able to meet and exceed the basic needs of every man, woman and child on the planet. Abundance for all is within our grasp. This bold, contrarian view, backed up by exhaustive research, introduces our near-term future, where exponentially growing technologies and three other powerful forces are conspiring to better the lives of billions. An antidote to pessimism by tech entrepreneur turned philanthropist, Peter H. Diamandis and award-winning science writer Steven Kotler.
Since the dawn of humanity, a privileged few have lived in stark contrast to the hardscrabble majority. Conventional wisdom says this gap cannot be closed. But it is closing—fast. The authors document how four forces—exponential technologies, the DIY innovator, the Technophilanthropist, and the Rising Billion—are conspiring to solve our biggest problems. Abundance establishes hard targets for change and lays out a strategic roadmap for governments, industry and entrepreneurs, giving us plenty of reason for optimism.
Examining human need by category—water, food, energy, healthcare, education, freedom—Diamandis and Kotler introduce dozens of innovators making great strides in each area: Larry Page, Steven Hawking, Dean Kamen, Daniel Kahneman, Elon Musk, Bill Joy, Stewart Brand, Jeff Skoll, Ray Kurzweil, Ratan Tata, Craig Venter, among many, many others.
He argues that there are many types of technologies being developed atm that will solve a lot of the current problems we're facing. Think about the problem of horse manure in cities that was solved with cars. So far I've read about how nanotechnology can be used to filter bacteria, virus and arsenic from water to provide clean water cheaply, reducing health problems and deaths, increasing productivity, and decreasing fertility rates (since there's a correlation between health and fertility rates).
Vertical farming (growing food in buildings) increasing yield per hectare and reducing transportation costs (since we can grow plants nearer cities)
Not to get off topic, but I'm not convinced that cars saved the environment from horse manure. Here is a good historical analysis of the situation.
It's hard to react when you've pasted a long article without even citing a few key points but I'll try. I welcome any corrections but atm I'm finding it to be completely ridiculous to the point of disbelief.
From Nautil.us: In short, the automobile didn’t arrive as an “environmental savior,” a solution to urban waste epitomized by horse manure in New York City streets. The poor horses, in fact, were only a small part of the problem. The car emerged with an orchestrated push by the auto industry, and its reign was paved by a rising demand for gasoline and government investment in highways, roads, and zoning regulations. Similarly it was a democratic drive, with legislation to follow, that gave us sanitation laws and cleaned up our streets.
1. Cars didn't save the city from horse manure because the horses were only a part of the problem: there are other sanitation problems like a lack of a municipal garbage collection.
The other sanitation problems aren't horse manure problems, so they are irrelevant to the affect of cars on horse manure.
It's like you're saying that you're not convinced that some hypothetical scientists who cured cancer really cured cancer because people also died from heart attacks.
3. The government invested in highways, roads, and zoning regulations.
The fact that there is additional support is also irrelavant. The US government also invested in schools, did they save the country from illiteracy?
It's like you're saying that you're not convinced that the scientists who cured cancer really cured cancer because the government invested heavily in it.
4. Legislatures and sanitation laws cleaned up our streets.
Once again, the fact that there is additional support is also irrelevant. No amount of legislation will completely clean up the streets if there were 200,000 horses running around.
Just look at what great work legislature did in eradicating crime in USA.
I appreciate your response. I also understand logical fallacies, though, so your "it's like..." hypotheticals are a little patronizing.
I was referring to this "phenomenon" of automobiles elimating the horse manure problem as an oversimplification -- not stating that automobiles did not contribute to a reduction in the horse population, resulting in a necessary decrease of horse manure. The article goes into detail about the transition from horse-carriages to automobiles as the primary method of transportation, so no, it doesn't solely address the issue and may provide details that are simply giving historical context. I did not mean to imply that every sentence in the article directly refuted your point.
Here's a better snippet that addresses the specific "automobiles saved the world from an overabundance of horse manure" argument:
“The automobile, cheaper to own and operate than a horse-drawn vehicle was proclaimed an ‘environmental savior.’ Cities around the world were able to take a deep breath—without holding their noses at last—and resume their march of progress.” To Levitt and Dubner, this historical turnabout teaches that technological innovation solves problems, and if it creates new problems, innovation will solve those, too.
It’s far too simplistic an interpretation. Cars didn’t replace horses, at least not in the way we usually think, and it was social as much as technological progress that solved the era’s pollution problems.
So really, my entire argument was simply that the rise of automobiles was not the primary factor in eliminating the problem of an overabundance of horse manure. It was a facilitating factor, but not the primary one. I apologize if the length of the article led you to believe that I was trying to make additional arguments as well.
On May 07 2014 23:53 zatic wrote: There will be still sex, but I believe there will be less. Human communication will in general get more sterile and less physical. We see some of the effects already today: I am thinking somewhat along the lines of this article http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/20/young-people-japan-stopped-having-sex
I would argue that Japan is such a bizarre outlier in terms of sexual perception that any trends among the population can't be projected.
On May 07 2014 23:53 zatic wrote: There will be still sex, but I believe there will be less. Human communication will in general get more sterile and less physical. We see some of the effects already today: I am thinking somewhat along the lines of this article http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/20/young-people-japan-stopped-having-sex
I would argue that Japan is such a bizarre outlier in terms of sexual perception that any trends among the population can't be projected.
Less about sex, but sometimes it feels like the unemployed / uneducated breed more than the people with jobs and careers.
On May 08 2014 01:43 Acertos wrote: Personally I truly think that humans are really mean by nature, well I don't say that myself but humans in general, if everything about them were known would be shown as bastards, egoists and opportunists.
I don't think humans have one true nature. One person can show extraordinary empathy, care or self-sacrifice one time and be spiteful, uncaring or selfish at another. Little things like sleep, stress hormone levels or various mood states can make a huge difference. We can see this in our primate relatives too, or even in other animals, so it seems both sides is part of our "true nature".
EPT
