Predictions of the Future...From the 1960s

kkleiner writes "Jetpacks, flying cars, death rays — the future isn't quite what the past hoped it would be. Of course, when predictions do come true it can be really shocking. Check out some of the more entertaining and eye-opening videos that show classic predictions from the 1960s. The Jet Age couldn't imagine the Age of Social Media clearly, but they got a few things right. And many more hilariously wrong."

Comments

Images of the future

[drolli]

Usually say more about the hopes and fears than about what will be. The Background of the 60s was the cold war. In the same way the background of the 90s lead to overly optimistic images of the future.

Re:Images of the future

[toQDuj]

Too bad you posted anon, so you will likely not read this.

Like most things, I find academia to be what you make of it. Sure, there are professors who've schmoozed their way into tenure and money, and continue to be lazy. However, many of them are actually genuinely interested in advancing with their topic and helping their group. Those are the ones to work for. And like you said, there is not much money to be got in academia compared to business, so I can't imagine profs doing it to line their pants. With lint.. maybe.

And yes, the work that is done is a lot, most of which will hardly be read and even more of which is ultimately a dead end. Such is life. But some progress is made. Some areas are progressing with leaps and bounds (computational chemistry, for one), and much insight is gained. Quick, it is not, and I do not expect to see much significant changes in my lifetime. But gradual progress is there, at a glacial pace, nearly too slow to see. Conferences are actually places where good progress is made, mostly by people putting their heads and ideas together. The fact that it's in Hawaii, or (in my case) in Australia does not change a thing. If we take the geometrical centre of the research activity we would be in South Europe (Italy, Spain) and the people still be complaining. It has to be somewhere.

Re:Images of the future

[myth24601]

All this crap about "investing" in education just serves to line fancy overpaid professors' pockets.

The problem isn't just fancy overpaid professors but bloated administration. From 1975 to 2008 the California State University system increased the number of faculty by 3% while increasing the number of administrators by 221% so that now there are more administrators than there are faculty.

funded by Monsanto

[KiloByte]

The House of the Future was funded by Monsanto who now is a scarily powerful biotech and genetically modified food conglomerate but who in the 1960s was all about plastics.

So nothing really changed.

Arthur C Clarke: Profiles of the Future.... 1962

[SomethingOrOther]

Arthur C Clarkes "Profiles of the Future" is the last word on this.
First published in 1962, it's predictions are amazingly accurate. It is a must for any geek bookshelf and I'm amazed so few have read it.

The (few!) things he did get wrong, he followed up in later editions of the book along with good explanations as to why that particular technology came about sooner / later than he predicted.

There is an excellent article about the book given in the Guardian Newspaper
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/mar/04/profiles-future-arthur-clarke-review
It is a fun book, much recommended.

I'd post a link to Amazon..... but I'd rather you buy a copy from your local independent bookshop :-)

The online shopping one is really accurate

[jez9999]

It shows the wife sitting at the console ordering her clothes, and then the husband paying for it at his console. Sounds about right.

Or is it we

[Bromskloss]

The Jet Age couldn't imagine the Age of Social Media clearly, but they got a few things right. And many more hilariously wrong.

Perhaps we are the ones who got it wrong.

Don't forget Google as predicted in 1964

[ribuck]

Don't forget Google as predicted in 1964 in a children's book.

Re:Did he predict the Internet?

[GameboyRMH]

The Internet has been predicted quite a few times. Off the top of my head, Mark Twain:

http://thetyee.ca/Books/2007/01/08/MarkTwain/

Also I found this article on the topic, although the comments are far more interesting than the article itself:

http://www.sfsignal.com/archives/2011/03/who-said-science-fiction-never-predicted-the-internet/

Lack of power

[Animats]

What went wrong with "the future" was that no new source of energy was developed. Fifty years ago, we had coal, oil, natural gas, hydropower, nuclear, wind, wind, biomass, and solar. Which is what we have now. Breeder reactors didn't work. Nuclear power didn't become "too cheap to meter". Fusion didn't work. Solar cells never became really cheap. Solar power satellites were a fantasy.

In each previous 50-year period back to 1800, there was some huge development that made energy cheaper. But in the last half-century, energy costs went up. This is the primary reason the exuberant energy-intensive future envisioned in the 1950s and 1960s didn't happen.

Looking ahead, there's nothing in sight that will lead to another era of cheap energy. Over the next fifty years, energy costs will go up and up.