Slashdot Mirror
The Times' Crystal Ball, Set To 2010
Lotek writes: "The NYT is running a cool 'Special section' from the NYT magazine [free reg. req. tl] this weekend showing off stuff they say we will be using in 2010. They discuss stuff like digital books, Nanotech anti-heart attack prevention, and regeneration. Way cool stuff."
The article lists a total of 32 items, and talks about the current state-of-the art as well as potential applications. Pretty cool, but 10 years seems awfully optimistic for some of them.
Theres a distinct parallel with this and an OS choice. exists primarily to empower the user.
Well, one notable difference is that when Windows crashes, you don't die. I hope you realize that your favorite toy is the leading non-disease cause of death for Americans. (check out the really cool & flexible database search I got that link from, btw)
I'm kinda OT here--you were complaining about George Jetson cars, not car alternatives, but the attitude that a personal four-seat internal combustion vehicle is a fundamental human right is beginning to get to me. Have you been downtown in a major city lately? I live near Boston, and Car Culture is killing the pleasure of being outdoors in my city. The noise, the stink, the endless loops of oppressive asphalt are choking any sort of pleasure in walking around in public places. And it's not like the motorists are happy either--they're stuck in frustrating jams because a car is not a good tool for getting around a city
Some other tangential points:
The Times bit about the personal-bubble rails is telling (see, I did have something to say about the actual article!). God forbid that you should actually have to associate with your fellow human beings on your way to work! Perhaps we can refine the technology further and have the rails run inside of buildings as well. Then you'd never have to leave your cube at all--what bliss!
It's fascinating when people get outraged over the price of gas--after all, everyone knows what it should cost, right? Gas should cost what it did when I first got my driver's license. If the price rises much above that, someone must be cheating.
You see, it turns out that a lot of people are still using horses. I'm not saying it's a good thing; I'm pointing out that it's there, it's real... and it's not in any way less relevant just because it's in the Third World.
Why is it not a good thing? Cars are expensive, unreliable, require maintenance, parts, fuel, and they don't handle rural roads very well.
In the same situation where cars aren't so good, however, horses excel. They handle rough terrain, they can pull plows and other implements of destruction, eat grass and etc. from a pasture, and can be somewhat self guided.
The right tool for the job is the one that does the job best for the least investment of time and money. If you decide that horses are a Bad Thing because they aren't "modern" enough, your approaching it from the wrong angle. The coolness factor is a hindrance to the decision making process, not an aid.
pornking
Think about it: Ten years ago, what would you think of an operating system created by some nobody hacker in Finland?
To be more accurate, ten years ago, UNIX--then twenty years old--was on everyone's "out" list.
In 2010 maybe we'll all be using Commodore 64's again?
Considering that the 1950s AVROcar actually flew, that's not a good track record.
Lesse: a drug that
Makes you look better
makes you lose weight
Keeps you "up"
Sounds good, ship it!
www.eFax.com are spammers
Claiming that quantum cryptography will bring impenetrable privacy to the masses is rather naive. Decent encryption is already available. How many people use it? The only thing that brings security to the masses is ease of use. If it takes any effort at all, no one will use it. Besides, encryption is only a small part of security.
We do not need advanced technology to save lives. We just have to have the political will to stand up to the auto companies and demand that the road slaughter stops.
How many years did it take to get even seat belts/safety glass in cars? After people started using them lives were saved. Princess Diana might be alive today if she had worn her seat belt. She was in a very expensive Mercedes with all the latest safety equipment. The only person to survive the crash was the bodyguard who was wearing his seat belt. What was the cause of the crash? A drunk driver in an overpowered car. BTW air bags did not help in this crash. They are expensive and have probably killed more kids and short people than would have been saved with seat belts alone.
It is ironic that if a plan or train crashes, there is a big investigation and whole fleets are grounded until the problem is fixed yet flying/rail are the two safest methods of travel. The auto companies on the other hand are allowed to produce vehicles that are inherently dangerous. This is shown about the number of auto fatalities that kill more people in a long weekend then all the air planes crashes in a year.
The auto companies could make a safe car but would anyone buy it? They would have to if there were stricter govt regulations. Right now the government pays lip service to safety.
Here are some simple solutions that would save 10,000 lives a year:
If the govt was serious about safety, they would not allow cars on the road that can do 150mph when the speed limit is 60mph.
Put real bumpers at a standard height on all vehicles.
Make breath analysers mandatary to start a car or at least on known impaired drivers.
Annual drivers test for anyone over 65.
The other best solution for reducing fatalities is divided highways. Expensive but saves head on collisions.
BTW If you want to see the real 'Jetsons Flying Car' check out the Moller Skycar.
Today's vices may be tomorrow's virtues.
Shit, I'm still waiting for my personal hovercraft and helicopter.
======
"Rex unto my cleeb, and thou shalt have everlasting blort." - Zorp 3:16
Sacred cows make the best burgers.
Now look. It's the middle of June 2000. Still no flying cars. Six months ago my last car died & I had to get a new one -- a plain old Neon. That's fine, I guess, but really upsets my years long plan here, namely to get a flying fuckin car in the year 2000. GODDAMMIT!
Alright, mister dee-troit automotive aeronautical engineers. You've got exactly five and a half months to ship me out something with wings and a great big fuckin rocket strapped on to the back, and if I can't spend new year's eve flying from here to Paris like Charles Frickin Lindbergh then I'm gonna take my plain old black bomber and I'm gonna slam it into your shiny corner office in Dearborn instead -- GOT IT?
Right!
DO NOT LEAVE IT IS NOT REAL
Nanotech can't be here in ten years....
...just like 640k will be enough for everybody. With the pace of technology nowadays, you can't say how long it will take. Think about it: Ten years ago, what would you think of an operating system created by some nobody hacker in Finland?
"I want a wristwatch that brings the world to me," he says. "With Internet access and a cell telephone. It would have my credit- and cash-card numbers installed inside too, so I wouldn't have to carry money and would only press a 'pay' button to buy things.
Ooookaay. Anyone else see the problem with this? How many times have you lost a watch, or had one stolen? And given that even using a WAP phone is a pain in the butt, what use would internet access on a watch be? How the hell are you gonna conduct a conversation with someone on a watch? What about power?
It's like this throughout most of the articles. It seems that they've just taken everyday stuff, and either minaturised it and/or added AI too it, without putting any real thought into it. Heard it all before, NYT.
Syllable : It's an Operating System
Nanotech anti-heart attack prevention
Excuse me, but wouldn't it be better to have a heart attack prevention device?War is one of the most horrible things a human can be exposed to. And one of the worlds largest industries.
(Silly /.: Actual article title should be "The Operating System You Ignore")
/will/ be operating systems, and just that?
Am I the only one who thinks that in 10 years time, operating systems
Windows, linux and MacOS will all perform the same functions the same way you'd expect them to. Something very similar to an anti-trust case happens, where it is shown that APIs need to be homogenized for all operating systems, so it's relatively easy to port code from one OS to another.
Java dies. Few tears are shed.
Focus goes back to what computing was originally about: Making it easy for us lazy humans.
Life is good.
Every so often you hear about how some new is going to revolutionize everything and how cars are going the way of the dinosaurs. I understand that to the majority of people, a car is a simple means of transportation. It gets you from where you are to where you want to be with a minimum of fuss, very convienient. But to a signifigant portion of drivers, a car is also a form of recreation. I personally fit into this category.
I'm one of those people that insist on a manual gearbox. Keep your automatic transmissions, semi-automatic "clutchless" manual transmissions (duh, the clutch is the whole point), and definately keep your ride damping systems that inhibit me from feeling exactly what the car is doing.
I know some people don't share even a nanometer of my view on this, but I'm hoping the majority here are open-minded to see the importance. Theres a distinct parallel with this and an OS choice. exists primarily to empower the user. You have full control of the entire system, and can change anything to suit your needs, if you so desire. exists primarily to shield the user from the complexities of a complex, flexible device in order to . I want the power of the former, it extends my abilities instead of hindering them, it keeps me in control.
I want my clutch, I like being able to feel the road, feel the yaw of my automobile, and adjust the amount of power getting to the wheels to compensate for traction. I refuse to give up one iota of control in the name of progress, since thats not really progress. Make it better by all means, independant suspension, variable-valve timing, electronic engine controls, all make a vehicle perform better, and helps the driver. Trying to completely replace the driver defeats the purpose.
Unless of course, you're just interested in getting from A to point B, and don't care how you get there (in which case, what are you doing here?).
Has anyone noticed that many of the things we have today were being written about and shown in movies and on television decades before they were in public use. I would suggest looking to television for future advances. For example, in Earth: Final Conflict, they use small devices called "globals" which can be used as cell phones, limited internet portals, personal organizers, and other things like that. With the advances in miniaturization of power cells, and the incresingly power efficient systems, these may soon become a common reality. Also, has anyone considered the possibilities of portable full-VR systems? The possibilities of VR used in concert with "Motionware"? This could allow people to be in conferences while in a car or on a plane. Just a few thoughts. "I hate quotations, I don't know enough to make a good one. You tell me what you know."
The Sunday Times do this all the friggin' time-- whenever they're really stuck for ideas for their colour supplement, somebody goes `Hey, we haven't done one of those House Of The Future articles for a good few weeks now!'. Arrggghh-- and they get paid for doing it, too!
:-) ). The children are inanely grinning at the pleasure they're receiving from being taught at home by a robo-tutor and (here's the science bit-- concentrate) the dad is teleworking over the internet having 200-way video conferencing with everybody in his office now that every home in the whole world has been fitted with free 1,000Gb Ethernet. Obviously nobody's imagination stretches to the fact that if daddy had all this technology at his disposal he'd be downloading porn and spending 24hrs a day attached to a catharter and drip feed, and his dick stuck in a robo-masturbator machine for uninterrupted pleasure.
You'd think these sorts of wanky journalistic daydreams might have moved on from the 50s, but oh noooooo: they get some artists in to draw some cheesy pictures of happy smiling housewives watching a robot octopus prepare dinner while another one files her toenails (very progressive
Okay, so journalists all over the world, stop this House of the Future nonsense. It's not big, it's not clever and it won't impress your mates.
Matthew @ Bytemark Hosting
All that stuff seems just dandy, but STILL NO JET PACKS!!! Come on, it's not that hard to do, I'm sure! For the love of god, we can make little cellular robots, but we can't strap a rocket and a helmet to a guy and make him fly?! --- evel aka matt "goddamnit."
This is the kind of driving that I want to let to my car. It's on the 2000th drive home when you get lazy looking at the same thing day after day and your mind drifts just a little bit. Yes the driver still needs control, yes the driver is still the driver, but automation is perfect for those little erands around town.
I would like nothing better than to jump in my car in the morning and punch in "gas station - work" and make a few phone calls in safety while my car does everything else.
___
or can you?
They make mention of a "virtual immune system" injected into your blood stream. This is anything but virtual. It may be "synthetic", "ancillary", "supplimentary", or" "replacement" but it is not "virtual".
"Improved-solids potato?" A starchy laxative substitute?
I like how they personify foods, as in this quote: "A huge part of the joy of the villains, Ice Cream and Fudge Sauce, is that they have no intention of improving the quality of our lives; they represent unrepentant decadence." I once at 14 fudge-cicles at a sitting... and then 10 the next evening. Decadence? No. Flatulence? Ahhhh yeah...
Vaccines in bananas = healthier primates.
Elevators that move laterally as well as vertically... complete with "candy-hooks" and and Oompa-Loompa attendant.
I'm not digging this "interest tracker"... an application that tracks eye movement to see what your interest is drawn to on the web page you're looking at. My data would read "eyes moved off-screent: interested in co-worker's ass."
A "wristwatch that brings the world to you" does not exactly "put the world at your finger tips." Dick Tracy's Watchphone was killer. Web browsing on your wristwatch is prohibitive. I kind of liked the "Demolition Man" idea of subdermal chip on the back of one's hand used for such things as opening doors, buying things, receiving fines for swearing, etc. I would like to see a watch that monitors blood-sugar and can interface with an insulin/glucose which regulates blood-sugar. The make mention of a heart-rate monitor... how about an adrenaline monitor? As your angst rises, your watch can scream, "Watch out! He's gonna kick your ass!" A libido monitor?
A little out of context fun: "My parents got me this last year," says Tanimoto, showing off her small, silvery accessory. "It's surprising how quickly it has become a necessity;..." What are the Japanese parents teaching their children?
Captain Kirk didn't use phasers to kill enemies? Why the different settings, or is the TNG? "Set your phasers to 'Hemmorhoid'. We don't want to kill anyone, just make their sphincters burn a little."
That brain-electrode thingy rocks. Why not insert electrodes into the speech-core (Boca's area? I forget) and perform speech recognition? Hook it up to that USB speech-to-text device I mentioned somewhere else. You could have to worlds first USB human. We could learn what dogs are saying! YES!
This brain cursor thing rocks. It's talking about the onscreen cursor becoming a part of the test subject. That's absolutely amazing to me. If they could provide him feedback (so booting into Windows caused pain...oh wait, it does...)
Evidently, by the jist of this article, when my watch is screming, "He's going to kick your ass!", I will be imaginging myself kicking some ass, and actually living the fantasty! Rock On!
Believe me, I know I don't add anything to this dicussion, I just like to tell people, "I'm published on the Internet!"
Talk to you later, -J.D.
For example:
Judge: "Who killed Mr. Jones?"
Teddy Bear (Eyes Light Up With Murderous Glee): "BOB!"
asdfjasdfhalvbbdnlfkhghfdsklgjhasdkrjw;ls40985u394 shafkjh4w5jh3q2w4oiuw4oiusdf8-0uear543u!
Nobody's ever gonna extract any useful message out of that one, not you, not me, not its intended recipient! Beat that, Future!
(Hint: they're called "Stairs".)
Stay up hacking each weekend. Sleep is for the week.
So, just to show how easy it is to make fantastic predictions like this, I'll make one of my own:
<smashes his crystal ball into a thousand pieces>
With apologies to JonKatz. Nah, nevermind... =)
Take the auto-driving car - this one will take alot longer than 10 years to have people start using it. Simple reason: fear. They don't want to drive something that could kill them.. and more importantly, people like control. A car that is controlled by a robot is frightening.
Or how about the "everybody's a temp" company. As if.. anyone heard of Microsoft? That's not from the future, it's from the past.
And then there's the phaser. Yeah.. right.. let's remember why people use guns - to KILL people. Ask any prison inmate how they can kill in a prison with no guns or metal. Until we address the issue of why people kill, every non-lethal weapon on the planet won't reduce the death count. There's a reason tasers didn't catch on - nobody wants a "useless" weapon. Yeah, that's it.. I'll just rob a bank with a non-lethal weapon.. sorry guys, but criminals aren't that stupid.
Oh, and how about the genetic-lawn? Wonderful idea, that.. I can understand why opponents call it "frankenlawn" - we've f*cked up genetic engineering enough times already - like a certain corn crop that won't reproduce.. and its pollen makes sure every other crop in the area does the same. Real smart, that - if the corn plant blows up we'll all starve to death! w00t w00t!
Those phaser thingies would make paint-balling much more fun.
Mahahahahahaaaaaa. >:-)
Seriously though, it would be great for law enforcement; no more having to worry (too much) about hitting innocent civilians, provided that it doesn't hurt too much.