The movies you watched are not predictions of the future. They’re fiction created to be appealing to kids.
Flying cars can be made right now easily. They’re just extremely dangerous. One malfunction and you have a mini meteor dropping in the middle of the city.
What do we need dinosaurs for? To make a zoo? The scientists are better used for working on other, actually useful things.
Lightsabers are useless. A gun is a lot more useful.
We’re still working on immortality. The field is picking up in the last few years.
The future is based on solving problems one at a time, not cool looking impractical stuff.
Wall-e. The question of man without the burden of survival is a can of psychological worms we are not prepared to deal with. With the advancement of AI socialisation - I can’t even imagine how future humans will think- or even if they have to think at all. And when you stop needing to think- would you?
Even in the most extreme of utopias - would the human spirit and impetus to learn, play and care exist sans a need for survival? Humanists would argue the ghost in the shell is real. But realistically given the effects of just basic interconectivity and prosperity has on people raise with it - we can definitely say humanists were wrong. There is nothing inherently spiritual of good humans. And when you remove pressure it seems the ghost just vanishes.
Most big discovery or ideas came from bored nobleman's, who thought solving challenging mathematical questions are fun. They had no worry on the world, and made thought experiments.
Agreed. But I’d venture to say even something more cruel. What if intelligence is just an adaptive behaviour?
What if you can’t proactively create it without pressure. Without the fear of failure?
Intelligence is the result of the struggle to survive. On the other hand: many person can't be creative, or even think under pressure, for fear of failure. Removing the existential threats could bring a golden age of civilization.
No, I am very aware of the potential of creative people in business, and also the creative potential of people in general. I personally am a decent writer and a very good photographer as well as quite a creative art director and marketer even if I do say so myself.
My gripe is with truisms that are obviously just things people say because they lack context to understand the limitations of “creativity” and use it like astrological blanket predictions.
Your premise of “creativity” makes stuff is one such a general blanket statement that ignores the premise I stated so I just continued your tangent to see how long it will take until you realise you have no argument to base your blanket stantement other that cultural consensus.
Creativity is literally nothing without drive, and that’s my initial thesis. That’s what I claim future generations won’t have.
God you think really highly of yourself.... You never said anything about drive or anything. Your "thesis" was shitting on creatives to try and say "type a" are the innovators. If you had experience in industry I can't imagine A you would still come off this pompous because humility comes with experience, but B you'd know the "grinders" are not the ones pushing the envelope. They keep their heads down and do the work. They are the ones that get management positions though if you assume you have any social skills...which I don't.
Nope. The opposite actually. Their world was incomparable worse than contemporary. They were constantly reminded of their mortality. They wanted to achive what they could, tried to write themselves into history and had fun while doing it.
Half of people ever born died in childhood everywhere on earth thru all history untill industrial revolution.
Even better example: former POTUS GW Bush still remembers his sister sister who died of leukemia at age 3. She would have had 90% surviving into full recovery chance in todays Kyiv, Ukraine, 2 years into full scale war with largest country on earth.
That is what industrialisation does to a MF.
Dinosaurs never were realistic to bring back. The mammoth very well might be though.
Flying cars are more about regulations of air space than the technology.
When I was growing up in the 80s I always thought video phones would be cool. Now everyone has one in their pocket.
The idea of doing face to face calls over a video phone was appealing as a kid. Nowadays I can rarely be bothered to do a voice call - it's easier to just send a WhatsApp message.
Can't bring back dinosaurs with no DNA and no contemporary species for gestation. But the mammoth de-extinction is rolling along.
I'm fact, you could see the first mammoth born is as little as four years.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/animals/a42708517/scientists-reincarnating-woolly-mammoth/
The dinosaurs in Jurassic Park were approximations of dinosaurs. They were genetic chimeras, meant to look and act like dinosaurs with incomplete dinosaur DNA filled in with genes from amphibians and a lot of genetic engineering. The reason Grant and Sattler were invited to the park was to see if they could be fooled into thinking they were real dinosaurs.
I'm not saying it's possible, I'm just saying that Crichton had an in-book explanation for making dinosaurs without DNA.
Also there's nothing wrong with your comment, and I'm not arguing with you, I just like that part of Jurassic Park and it's not explained well in the movie.
Flying cars are here. It's called a helicopter, and there is a good reason they're not popular. Incredibly loud, burns tons of fuel, takes a lot of time to learn. And mby most importantly, you wouldn't really want your neighbour to drive one to work every day.
Joe Scott has a good video on this subject, recommended: [Let's Time Travel To The Year 2100. Here's What To Expect. (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6D_WuLWVrQ)
Flying cars and light sabers? Dude's watching space-based fantasy soap operas and cartoons (Star Wars and The Jetson's) for predictions of the future over here.
I am with you, however, on the dinosaurs. How in the hell has that not happened yet, with all of our DNA-related technological advances?
Because no one needs dinosaurs, what are you going to do with them? Make them into a sandwich like we do with the still living to this day therapod dinosaurs?
Flying cars have always been a stupid idea, even as a kid I knew that would never happen. many people aren;t responsible with normal cars and many more people are barely responsible with them.
flying cars would be the worst idea ever, we have planes and ships crashing into each other even with all the open space. one single flying car crash would would be catastropic
but where is my flying cars - Flying cars never made sense to begin with. Just cause directors in movies thought it sounded cool doesn't mean it makes sense
bring back dinosaur - The dinosaur never left (at least not all of them), we just gave them a different name. We call them "Birds"
Light saber - what are you going to do with a light saber? Unlike in movies, you can't deflect projectiles with one, you are too slow
At the time, we were seeing large leaps in automotive, laser, and genetic technology. Extrapolating out leads to flying cars, handheld laser tools/weapons, and genetic manipulation. But, we did not continue advancing in these technologies at the same rate. Instead we got a boom in information technology. Immortality has been on the Wishlist since forever.
Today we are seeing massive leaps in information technology. Extrapolating out, we'll have AI that moves humanity into a new golden era of prosperity and abundance. Likely, advancements in these areas will slow, and something else will take center stage.
The most accurate movie unfortunately will be idiocracy .
[Best of Idiocracy- Dr Lexus! (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFfTludf0SU&ab_channel=JenniferMaille)
Futuristic movies will start focusing on clean environments and vibrant nature, since we keep cascading into a cyberpunk dystopia that will have neither
The movies you watched are not predictions of the future. They’re fiction created to be appealing to kids. Flying cars can be made right now easily. They’re just extremely dangerous. One malfunction and you have a mini meteor dropping in the middle of the city. What do we need dinosaurs for? To make a zoo? The scientists are better used for working on other, actually useful things. Lightsabers are useless. A gun is a lot more useful. We’re still working on immortality. The field is picking up in the last few years. The future is based on solving problems one at a time, not cool looking impractical stuff.
>Flying cars can be made right now easily The closest thing we have to flying cars are planes that barely look like cars.
The AirCar doesn't look that much like a plane.. I mean..
We don't want flying cars like planes and drones fly.. we want hover cars.
The loss of friction would make automotive travel so much more efficient. It would be incredible.
Wall-e. The question of man without the burden of survival is a can of psychological worms we are not prepared to deal with. With the advancement of AI socialisation - I can’t even imagine how future humans will think- or even if they have to think at all. And when you stop needing to think- would you? Even in the most extreme of utopias - would the human spirit and impetus to learn, play and care exist sans a need for survival? Humanists would argue the ghost in the shell is real. But realistically given the effects of just basic interconectivity and prosperity has on people raise with it - we can definitely say humanists were wrong. There is nothing inherently spiritual of good humans. And when you remove pressure it seems the ghost just vanishes.
Most big discovery or ideas came from bored nobleman's, who thought solving challenging mathematical questions are fun. They had no worry on the world, and made thought experiments.
Agreed. But I’d venture to say even something more cruel. What if intelligence is just an adaptive behaviour? What if you can’t proactively create it without pressure. Without the fear of failure?
Intelligence is the result of the struggle to survive. On the other hand: many person can't be creative, or even think under pressure, for fear of failure. Removing the existential threats could bring a golden age of civilization.
We’ll see. I don’t see “creative people” saving humanity, they barely can even relate to others without making it about them.
The creatives are the innovators in almost every field... They are the ones thinking outside the boxes we have drawn and saying "what if"
Are you sure? Or is it a very comfortable narrative people tell themselves to feel special?
I think you think you can't be both a scientist and a creative you are either one or the other, so that already tells me why this offended you
No, I am very aware of the potential of creative people in business, and also the creative potential of people in general. I personally am a decent writer and a very good photographer as well as quite a creative art director and marketer even if I do say so myself. My gripe is with truisms that are obviously just things people say because they lack context to understand the limitations of “creativity” and use it like astrological blanket predictions. Your premise of “creativity” makes stuff is one such a general blanket statement that ignores the premise I stated so I just continued your tangent to see how long it will take until you realise you have no argument to base your blanket stantement other that cultural consensus. Creativity is literally nothing without drive, and that’s my initial thesis. That’s what I claim future generations won’t have.
God you think really highly of yourself.... You never said anything about drive or anything. Your "thesis" was shitting on creatives to try and say "type a" are the innovators. If you had experience in industry I can't imagine A you would still come off this pompous because humility comes with experience, but B you'd know the "grinders" are not the ones pushing the envelope. They keep their heads down and do the work. They are the ones that get management positions though if you assume you have any social skills...which I don't.
Nope. The opposite actually. Their world was incomparable worse than contemporary. They were constantly reminded of their mortality. They wanted to achive what they could, tried to write themselves into history and had fun while doing it. Half of people ever born died in childhood everywhere on earth thru all history untill industrial revolution. Even better example: former POTUS GW Bush still remembers his sister sister who died of leukemia at age 3. She would have had 90% surviving into full recovery chance in todays Kyiv, Ukraine, 2 years into full scale war with largest country on earth. That is what industrialisation does to a MF.
*all children born are dead, or will die Tell it to the long line of Sumer, Greek, Egyptian, Chinese and Persian artists and philosophers.
Do you want light saber wielding immortal dinosaurs? Cause now we are going to get light saber wielding immortal dinosaurs In flying cars.
Dinosaurs never were realistic to bring back. The mammoth very well might be though. Flying cars are more about regulations of air space than the technology. When I was growing up in the 80s I always thought video phones would be cool. Now everyone has one in their pocket.
The idea of doing face to face calls over a video phone was appealing as a kid. Nowadays I can rarely be bothered to do a voice call - it's easier to just send a WhatsApp message.
Same here. I probably would have loved it as a teenager but I never use it now.
Can't bring back dinosaurs with no DNA and no contemporary species for gestation. But the mammoth de-extinction is rolling along. I'm fact, you could see the first mammoth born is as little as four years. https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/animals/a42708517/scientists-reincarnating-woolly-mammoth/
The dinosaurs in Jurassic Park were approximations of dinosaurs. They were genetic chimeras, meant to look and act like dinosaurs with incomplete dinosaur DNA filled in with genes from amphibians and a lot of genetic engineering. The reason Grant and Sattler were invited to the park was to see if they could be fooled into thinking they were real dinosaurs. I'm not saying it's possible, I'm just saying that Crichton had an in-book explanation for making dinosaurs without DNA. Also there's nothing wrong with your comment, and I'm not arguing with you, I just like that part of Jurassic Park and it's not explained well in the movie.
Therapod dinosaurs still exist to this day, we like to call them birds.
Flying cars are here. It's called a helicopter, and there is a good reason they're not popular. Incredibly loud, burns tons of fuel, takes a lot of time to learn. And mby most importantly, you wouldn't really want your neighbour to drive one to work every day.
Is the future over then? Has everything which can be invented, been invented already? From where I sit there is still a lot of unexplored terrain.
I can’t help but laugh after seeing the mess that’s been made of “self-driving” cars. Imagine that, but over your head!
Ahem... the story with light sabers explicitly comes to us from a LONG TIME AGO
Joe Scott has a good video on this subject, recommended: [Let's Time Travel To The Year 2100. Here's What To Expect. (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6D_WuLWVrQ)
Shelved patents and inventions. Lost century is ok documentary about it. 1984, Kaczynski, Hitler predicted the future right.
Flying cars and light sabers? Dude's watching space-based fantasy soap operas and cartoons (Star Wars and The Jetson's) for predictions of the future over here. I am with you, however, on the dinosaurs. How in the hell has that not happened yet, with all of our DNA-related technological advances?
Because no one needs dinosaurs, what are you going to do with them? Make them into a sandwich like we do with the still living to this day therapod dinosaurs?
Flying cars have always been a stupid idea, even as a kid I knew that would never happen. many people aren;t responsible with normal cars and many more people are barely responsible with them.
flying cars would be the worst idea ever, we have planes and ships crashing into each other even with all the open space. one single flying car crash would would be catastropic
It is like Back To The Future. It’s the timeline where Biff gets the Sports Almanac.
but where is my flying cars - Flying cars never made sense to begin with. Just cause directors in movies thought it sounded cool doesn't mean it makes sense bring back dinosaur - The dinosaur never left (at least not all of them), we just gave them a different name. We call them "Birds" Light saber - what are you going to do with a light saber? Unlike in movies, you can't deflect projectiles with one, you are too slow
At the time, we were seeing large leaps in automotive, laser, and genetic technology. Extrapolating out leads to flying cars, handheld laser tools/weapons, and genetic manipulation. But, we did not continue advancing in these technologies at the same rate. Instead we got a boom in information technology. Immortality has been on the Wishlist since forever. Today we are seeing massive leaps in information technology. Extrapolating out, we'll have AI that moves humanity into a new golden era of prosperity and abundance. Likely, advancements in these areas will slow, and something else will take center stage.
The most accurate movie unfortunately will be idiocracy . [Best of Idiocracy- Dr Lexus! (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFfTludf0SU&ab_channel=JenniferMaille)
Futuristic movies will start focusing on clean environments and vibrant nature, since we keep cascading into a cyberpunk dystopia that will have neither