Slashdot Mirror


Nike and Boeing Are Paying Sci-Fi Writers To Predict Their Futures (medium.com)

Brian Merchant, writing for Medium : In 2017, PricewaterhouseCoopers, the professional services firm that advises 440 of the Fortune 500 companies, published a blueprint for using science fiction to explore business innovation. The same year, the Harvard Business Review argued that "business leaders need to read more science fiction" in order to stay ahead of the curve. "We're already seeing science fiction become reality today," said Google's then-CEO Eric Schmidt in 2012. "Think back to Star Trek, or my favorite, the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy -- much of what those writers imagined is now possible," he said, ticking off auto-translation, voice recognition, and electronic books. Jeff Bezos' product design team built the Kindle to spec from Neal Stephenson's book The Diamond Age. (Stephenson himself is the chief future at the multibillion-dollar-valued Magic Leap.) Josh Wolfe, a managing partner at Lux Capital, is pouring millions of dollars into companies building what he explicitly describes as "the sci-fi future." "I'm looking for things that feel like they were once written about in science fiction," he told Fortune. "The gap between 'sci-fi,' -- that which was once imagined -- and 'sci-fact,' that which becomes manifest and real, is shrinking."

A number of companies, along with a loose constellation of designers, marketers, and consultants, have formed to expedite the messy creative visualization process that used to take decades. For a fee, they'll prototype a possible future for a client, replete with characters who live in it, at as deep a level as a company can afford. They aim to do what science fiction has always done -- build rich speculative worlds, describe that world's bounty and perils, and, finally, envision how that future might fall to pieces. Alternatively referred to as sci-fi prototyping, futurecasting, or worldbuilding, the goal of these companies is generally the same: help clients create forward-looking fiction to generate ideas and IP for progress or profit. Each of the biggest practitioners believe they have their own formulas for helping clients negotiate the future. And corporations like Ford, Nike, Intel, and Hershey's, it turns out, are willing to pay hefty sums for their own in-house Minority Reports.

58 comments

  1. Tennis shoes... in space!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whereâ(TM)s my money

    1. Re:Tennis shoes... in space!!!! by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      Potatoes already made it in Star Wars.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    2. Re:Tennis shoes... in space!!!! by mermeid007 · · Score: 1

      Amazing. Send them an invoice in super large print. You know Bezos eyes are ruined from years of staring at UPS and FEDEX tracking screens.

    3. Re:Tennis shoes... in space!!!! by PPH · · Score: 1

      They said Nike and Boeing. Not Nike and SpaceX.

      Boeing would be about getting your tennis shoes stuck under the airline seat in front of you.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    4. Re:Tennis shoes... in space!!!! by mermeid007 · · Score: 1

      There will be no peace for science fiction writers, will there? They just keep on writing.

  2. Good on these guys by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They found a way to BS their way into making a lot of money telling rich dudes how great they are.

    1. Re:Good on these guys by mermeid007 · · Score: 1

      Dude, some of the stories these guys write are really sweet sci-fi novellas

  3. Really? by alvinrod · · Score: 1

    Paying science fiction writers to predict the future is idiotic. If you poll the entirety of science fiction you will certainly find several ideas that have become reality, but you'll also find countless others that did not or failed to materialize.

    I predict that companies that find out what customers want right now and figure out how to deliver that to them at the greatest cost will have profitable futures. I'm less certain about those that waste money on things like this. I foresee the departure of the idiots that approved this idea (which is probably just a way to get someone they know a job at the company) in the near future when the quarterlies don't meet investor expectations.

    1. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They aren't paying ALLLLLL science fiction writers you genius. Just ones who have good sellable idea seeds that they like, derp. It's actually a great idea to solicit future-leaning marketing ideas way out in front. It costs very little.

      You sound angry about something, maybe you just don't understand it.

    2. Re: Really? by kzanol · · Score: 1

      This really triggers a deja vu moment for listeners of the escape pod podcast just in September there was a two part episode perfectly Matched to this topic: The revolution, brought to you by Nike. http://escapepod.org/2018/09/0... Also shows that the results probably aren't necessarily what you wanted...

      --
      you have moved your mouse, please reboot to make this change take effect
    3. Re:Really? by Dragonslicer · · Score: 2

      I predict that companies that find out what customers want right now and figure out how to deliver that to them at the greatest cost will have profitable futures.

      The companies that will have a more profitable future are the ones that can find out what customers will want in X years, where X is the number of years it takes to get the product to market. If you wait until you can see what people are buying, you run the risk of not being able to catch up.

    4. Re:Really? by alvinrod · · Score: 2

      If that were actually easy, some company would have completely taken over the planet by now. The other side of that is if you invest in something that doesn't pan out, you've not only spent a large amount of time and resources producing something that has little or no value, but you're in exactly the same position you would have been had you taken a wait and see approach.

      Over the long run, it's probably better to take a wait and see approach and get good and building things at lower cost. In a lot of ways, I think this is the approach that Apple has taken. They very rarely invent some new way of doing things, but they are pretty good at identifying a good idea and polishing the hell out of it to bring it to the mass market. People like to praise the vision of Steve Jobs, but it would have been almost entirely useless without the execution of Tim Cook.

      When Apple does try to guess where things are headed next, they've rarely had anywhere near the success as taking something that consumers want now, and figuring out how to supply that at low costs. People like to think that Apple just makes computers and overcharges for them, but the other way of looking at that is that Apple has identified what customers are willing to buy and has figured out how to supply that product for a fraction of the sale price.

      If you're particularly good at playing catch up, why spend money chasing down the next idea when you can get others to spend the time and effort doing that for you. Meanwhile, invest your money into manufacturing techniques that will enable you to deliver products at lower cost, enabling you to be more competitive on price or to haul in a larger share of profit.

  4. Why not futurists by jellomizer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There is a bit of a difference between Sci-Fi writers and Futurists.
    The biggest problem Science Fiction is the Fiction part. For every technology that came into use, there is a dozen that never made it, even if it is considered possible nowadays.

    For TV and Movies one of the biggest things they love to show is the holographic or transparent display. This makes for good visuals, because you can see people working on the technology without the technology blocking their faces. But in real life, your text will be hard to read and often distracting with everything happening behind it. Think of setting you Term settings in Linux/OS X to be 100% transparent (I normally keep it below 10%). It may look interesting for a while but shortly it is more of a problem then it helps, with windows with text behind it. or with a color that matches your text color....

    Futurists on the other hand are not interested in the story, but thinking of the natural progression of such products and just giving the possibilities on what may be expected. Low Energy Aircraft, means cheaper operations, which means more leg room, because you don't need to cram people in the plane to make a flight profitable. Or shoes that fit better on different types of feet, that are easier to put on and off while maintaining the perfect fit.

    A sci-fi writer will take these ideas and just have a comfortable flight in an electric aircraft, or able to bolt on comfortable shoes. While their plot is more interested in something else.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    1. Re:Why not futurists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Low Energy Aircraft, means cheaper operations, which means more leg room, because you don't need to cram people in the plane to make a flight profitable."

      You're so cute. It means you can cram more people in the plane and make even more profit.

    2. Re:Why not futurists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Low Energy Aircraft, means cheaper operations, which means more leg room, because you don't need to cram people in the plane to make a flight profitable.

      Bah, which we all know means they cram more people in to make even more profit, not put in fewer people in more comfort. That's what corporations do, and the certainly don't pass savings on to customers.

      I think my biggest problem with this is that while Sci-Fi writers who are writing about a possible future and saying "what if", this is a very cynical thing of "hey, if we get Sci-Fi writers to predict the future we can figure out what to build".

      This feels entirely backwards as they're trying to use it as a predictive tool, and not letting naturally good Sci-Fi bubble to the top -- instead they're commissioning someone to read the tea leaves for them so they have a blue print.

      Somehow, that feels like it just isn't going to work just because a large company paid for it.

      You might as well use a ouija board at that point. This just doesn't seem like something you can tap into on demand.

      But, I'm sure some writers will make bank and give them what they want, and then we'll watch a corporation trying to immediately turn it into a product.

    3. Re:Why not futurists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Making on-screen elements transparent on a flat display has no relationship to doing the same in 3D space.

    4. Re:Why not futurists by Krishnoid · · Score: 1

      The Canadian army commissioned a couple books on simulated future military engagements (free for reading).

    5. Re: Why not futurists by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Cramming more people means more mass, though. Mass is going to be expensive if the airplane is lightweight.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    6. Re: Why not futurists by houghi · · Score: 1

      More legroom? You mean more rows of people.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  5. Seemingly against the tide by Headw1nd · · Score: 1

    It's strange this is happening now when it seems Sci-Fi as a genre seems to be a historic low. I was just talking to a good friend about the difficultly of finding anything good among recently written sci-fi novels, it seems everything has devolved into incoherent fanfic-like neofantasy. I tend to think we've just moved to a point where trying to imagine the world in 40 years is almost impossible, the few futurists we do have seem to produce what would have been regarded in the past as modest goals and short horizons. I wonder if this is related: does the lack of public futurism mean that the private businesses have to create their own?

    1. Re:Seemingly against the tide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " trying to imagine the world in 40 years is almost impossible"

      It's possible, it's just been done countless times over. It's hard to have both an original and plausible idea about the future.

    2. Re:Seemingly against the tide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I think what you're decrying is the Sci-Fi banner got applied to anything with future/space/magic/etc in it, and so the Genre title means little compared to what it USED to mean, which was hardcore reality-extrapolated fiction. But you can still find good stuff if you know who/what to look for, just.. .not on network television, of course.

    3. Re:Seemingly against the tide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Imagining the world in 40 years isn't impossible, it's just really, really depressing, because we let crazy people make policies that will impact the future of civilization.

    4. Re:Seemingly against the tide by Headw1nd · · Score: 1

      Also, if anyone has some good sci-fi book recommendations let me know.

    5. Re:Seemingly against the tide by StevenMaurer · · Score: 2

      I couldn't agree with this more. I write hard and semi-hard (at least plausible) speculative fiction. But I only self-publish, since most houses mostly all just want Marvel-esque adventure stories, filed with superhero and/or gaming-protagonist tropes. That is, if they're interested at all - and there are economic reasons why they shouldn't.

      Real Science Fiction inherently appeals to only a small segment of the market already (i.e. intelligent people). This is why "Rick and Morty" struggles, while "Big Bang Theory" (which makes fun of intelligent people) succeeds.

    6. Re:Seemingly against the tide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      1) There are thousands of different people posting as AC, so how will he know when he is replying to one of our posts?
      2) I don't believe you are actually the original AC, since his post was quite interesting and articulate
      3) You are a very bad person

    7. Re:Seemingly against the tide by rtb61 · · Score: 0

      Look this is all about manipulation and control, any 'futurist', those who find long term probability outcomes over time for large data sets endlessly fun and interesting, will know exactly that and well, yeah kind of fuck off, I know what you want to do, so well, cost more money than it will ever be worth to you ie give me your company and I will tell you how to run it properly ;). In other words, want to be shallow minded dickbrains, don't expect my deep thoughts to serve your idiot ego and genitals.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    8. Re:Seemingly against the tide by mikael · · Score: 2

      It's probably because just about anything written about in the past sci-fi novels is now possible. Those little worm drones in Dune that could climb walls, relay video and sound as well as inject poison? That's doable. Tiny little drones with cameras? Done. Tricorder with multispectral scanner? Done. Touchscreens? Done. Full dome displays? Done. VR headsets? Done. Swarms of microbots? Done.
      Video-on-Demand by cable? Done. Talking car? Done. Remote surveillance of your home by pocket videoscreen? Done.

      If we look at how we lived back in the 1960's compared to now, the only changes have been the shape and size of TV screens, electronics and home appliances. We've mapped the human genome, virome, proteonome, and every other -ome there is.

      The only things left are holographic displays, light sabers, flying cars, time travel and teleportation. Maybe the first two can be done using air ionization:
      https://nerdist.com/the-future...

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    9. Re:Seemingly against the tide by terrycarlino · · Score: 1

      Nike for one isn't interested in tech progression. They're interested selling stuff.

      The basic change between the 1960's and now is that in the 1960's no one wore athletic shoes outside the gym. In the gym they bought whatever brand shoes the local shoe store or five and dime stocked. By and large brand names weren't a thing except for the very rich, and they did not buy off the rack.

      As for Boeing in the 1960s only upper middle class and above flew. Most people going to Europe still went by ocean liner. For most other people an airplane flight was a few times in a lifetime thing.

      In Nike's case the change is almost 100% about marketing.

      In Boeing's case its all about deregulation of the airlines, advancement of technology, post-9/11, and lack of competition.

    10. Re:Seemingly against the tide by pnutjam · · Score: 1

      In the 50's and 60's the future seemed poised to solve all our problems. Now we've figured out that a subset is holding everything back and poised to destroy progress. It seems hopeless so you end up with dystopian futures. SOme plausable, The Water Knife is good, some less so, the forest of hands and teeth is a good example of this.

  6. Little Bit Like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Governments and politicians use dystopian novels for dreaming the future of governance. It was a high time that the corporations do the same. How else we could have that world of Neuromancer?

  7. Kerblam! by jd · · Score: 1

    +Oh, that's already been done.

    Fred Hoyle talked of geoengineering in A for Andromeda, back in the 1950s, a bit more potent than the sort being discussed these days.

    Carl Sagan's Contact discussed self-describing engineering schematics. You need know nothing but mathematics. Self-describing data formats exist, but not to that degree.

    Terry Nation discussed automatically self-healing systems. Perhaps some form of Von Neumann Universal Constructor. Only Zen knows for sure.

    He also described the Tarriel Cell, a revolutionary new way to perform computations, complete with SPECTRE bug. Shows he was ahead of his time. However, the Tarriel Cell seems to be a highly advanced Quantum Computing device that is compact and portable.

    The sonic screwdriver may take a little longer.

    Regeneration, however, is very doable. You just need to have nanobots in each cell that have the turbo codes for each gene in the DNA, Reed-Solomon codes for each codon and Universal Constructor blueprints on how to build a cell. Then, no matter what happens, the cell can be reconstructed from scratch without inhibiting the cell's own ability to restructure itself.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  8. wings by magarity · · Score: 2

    Boeing's future includes flying wing airliners or at least blended wing body airliners. Fuel efficiency will eventually demand it.

  9. Reminds me of the death of the cyberpunk genre by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because we're living it now. Sure, there's a bit less 80s neon, and the Japanese certainly didn't end up taking over the world, but still...

  10. Not Surprising by The+Snazster · · Score: 1

    For a short time, I once joined one of those high IQ societies. It was kind of like Mensa, although it was much more restrictive. I dropped out when real life got too distracting. One of the most interesting things, at least to me, was that there were periodically offers of payment, by various firms and other organizations, to members, if we would just participate on their blogs (these were not blogs open to the general public).

    It's hardly surprising to see them hoping to mine ideas from other sources as well. The benefit to cost payoff is potentially huge, especially as the money involved probably wouldn't even have kept gas in my car.

    1. Re:Not Surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For a short time, I once joined one of those high IQ societies. It was kind of like Mensa, although it was much more restrictive.

      God, in my experience the people who self select for being in high IQ clubs are among the most tedious individuals I've ever met.

      Everybody who has ever mentioned they're in Mensa has been a complete ass who just wanted to show off and have other people go "oooh, Mensa, how cool". In a lot of ways, it's the most shallow way of self selecting I've ever encountered. Their mom drops them off so they can have pop and chips and get out of the house for a while, and then they go home for bed time and their job as a security guard.

      The funniest thing to see is the look on one of their faces when you say "gee, Mensa, I could join but why would I want to hang out with a bunch of pompous asses who can't tie their shoes but want to be acknowledged as smarter than everybody else?", followed by turning around and walking away.

      I've never met a single person who claimed to be in Mensa who wasn't a complete ass, and I've never made any effort to hang out with them.

      You've obviously self selected back out of that little clique of dorks. Good for you.

  11. Chitty Chitty Bang Bang by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not even sci-fi! Where's my flying car?

  12. Because ... by PPH · · Score: 1

    ... that worked out so well in the past

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  13. General Motors hired Kim Stanley Robinson by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    His recommendation: spend whatever it takes to reach the stars. Then upon encountering the very first problem there, immediately give up.

    1. Re:General Motors hired Kim Stanley Robinson by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and 14,000 people will be looking for jobs in two days. These people used to assemble automobiles; no, they were not replaced by robots. The truck and SUV market had reached saturation point.

  14. Nike and Boeing by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 0

    Nike: Bankrupt. People will stop wearing shoes when personal robots carry you everywhere. Step on the low robot platform and it will move around for you.
    Boeing: Bankrupt. People will stop flying on commercial airlines as soon as automated mini aircraft are commissionable.

    Do you think they will pay me for that? Probably not. I need to write a more rosy story to poke their egos for them to believe it.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    1. Re:Nike and Boeing by tchdab1 · · Score: 2

      Reread that: If you’re right, if people stop wearing shoes because something is transporting them around, who’s going to design/build/maintain/profit from those transporters? New Nike?
      Who’s going to do the same for the mini aircraft, New Boeing?
      If you think new environments/techs are going to displace the old and so this is a worthless exercise, you missed the point.

    2. Re:Nike and Boeing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clearly Nike will just make shoes for the robots.

  15. Surprise: What is Winter Sunlight? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For this reason, God sends them a powerful delusion(operation of wandering)(planet) so that they will believe the lie.
    Working of Error

  16. sci-fi is the wrong tool! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Again and again, stupid people think sci-fi predicts the future. It doesn't, it merely reflects the present, with one or another conceit. Something technological, maybe possible, maybe impossible.

    So yeah stupid business people, free your imaginations, but not in such a limited way as sci-fi

  17. Bankruptcy Liquidation Acquistion by another corp by Crashmarik · · Score: 1

    Or one of the many other forms of corporate death. Nothing lasts forever.

  18. Nike's wet dream by nwaack · · Score: 0

    A future where the only people who wear their overpriced crap are spoiled liberal SJW millenials who kneel during anthems, hate police and love communism.

    Nike's leadership can take their sweatshop-made junk and shove it right up their arses. SWOOSH!!!

    1. Re:Nike's wet dream by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A future where the only people who wear their overpriced crap are spoiled liberal SJW millenials who kneel during anthems, hate police and love communism.

      Aww ... show us where the bad man touched you.

      Grow up.

  19. Story with a marathon on the moon by hazem · · Score: 1

    I can't remember the novel it came from, but there was a sci-fi book where there's a flashback about one of the main characters when he ran a marathon on the moon. It was a neat account of overcoming the challenges of running in a specialized suit that could handle the challenges of air processing, temperature, sharp regolith, etc. for running on the moon. I imagined it with various logos from current sporting goods companies. It puts a different twist on Nike's "Lunar Flyknit" shoes.

    I think it might have been a Heinlein book.

  20. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 0

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  21. Look at 2001: A Space Odyssey... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Their thinking on this matter is flawed. Pan American World Airways, originally founded as Pan American Airways and commonly known as Pan Am, was the principal and largest international air carrier in the United States from 1927 until its collapse on December 4, 1991.

  22. the coming Shoe Event Horizon . . . by swell · · Score: 1

    TFS refers to both the Nike shoe company and the book- Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Well, right there Nike can save a small fortune by simply reading that book. It predicts the future of the shoe industry as revealed by our favorite SciFi writer:

    "The Shoe Event Horizon is an economic theory that draws a correlation between the level of economic (and emotional) depression of a society and the number of shoe shops the society has.

    The theory is summarized as such: as a society sinks into depression, the people of the society need to cheer themselves up by buying themselves gifts, often shoes. It is also linked to the fact that when you are depressed you look down at your shoes and decide they aren't good enough quality so buy more expensive replacements. As more money is spent on shoes, more shoe shops are built, and the quality of the shoes begins to diminish as the demand for different types of shoes increases. This makes people buy more shoes.

    The above turns into a vicious cycle, causing other industries to decline.

    Eventually the titular Shoe Event Horizon is reached, where the only type of store economically viable to build is a shoe shop. At this point, society ceases to function, and the economy collapses, sending a world spiraling into ruin." https://hitchhikers.fandom.com...

    The Firesign Theater had their own thoughts on the economics of shoes:
    "Shoes for Industry! Shoes for the Dead! Shoes for Industry!
            HI! I'm Joe Beats.

    Say, what chance does a deceased returning war veteran have for that good payin' job, more sugar, and that free Mule we've all been dreaming of?

    Now take off your shoes.

    Now you can see how increased spending opportunities, mean harder work for everyone, and more of it, too! So, do yourself a favor, Joe. Join with millions of your friends and neighbors, and, TAKE OFF YOUR SHOES!

    "For INDUSTRY!"

    --
    ...omphaloskepsis often...
  23. more proof by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That all the assholes in charge of the world's capital are idealess morons bereft of creativity, or as silly con valley calls them, "innovators".

  24. So, what the US gov't started doing years ago? by whitroth · · Score: 1

    Niven and Pournelle were on it. Raygun started doing it.
    https://www.newamerica.org/wee...

    And there's an sf think tank...

    Now, on the other hand, the folks here who here who think they know what sf is are ignorant idiots. SF is FICTION. It's written to tell a story. One of the classic definitions of what sf is is the literature of "what if?"

    SF authors are not writing to Predict The Future, they're writing to tell a good story. Can some things in those stories create enthusiasm for science and engineering? We knw they do. Can they suggest lines of thought that might lead to new ides? Of course. But confusing the literature of sf and "predictions" is for the clueless.

  25. No mention of Kodak? by PJ6 · · Score: 1

    Kodak hired a futurist company to envision the future of film, and they said the future was digital - so Kodak fired them.

    Any well-established business will violently dismiss anything truly useful that comes out of such a creative exercise.

    Nothing to see here.

  26. Stanley Kubrick predicted... by djago · · Score: 0

    "At Pan Am, the sky is no longer the limit..." in "2001: A Space Odyssey". He also contributed with science! But seriously, predict a company's future? Has anyone predicted 25 years ago that today everybody would be a zombie walking down the road, staring at a cell phone interconnected via The Internet? Posting every step in Facebook and Instagram?