Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Predicting Life 100 Years From Now

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the still-no-flying-cars-i-bet dept.

News 552

New submitter Simon321 writes "BBC News has an interesting article about the top predictions for life 100 years from now. The highlights include extensive farming of the ocean, wiring all sorts of computers to our brains, space elevators, and the break-up of the United States. 'There are some indications already that California wants to split off and such pressures tend to build over time. It is hard to see this waiting until the end of the century. Maybe an East Coast cluster will want to break off too. Pressures come from the enormous differences in wealth generation capability, and people not wanting to fund others if they can avoid it.'"

cancel ×

552 comments

Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (2, Informative)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716396)

'There are some indications already that California wants to split off and such pressures tend to build over time. It is hard to see this waiting until the end of the century. Maybe an East Coast cluster will want to break off too. Pressures come from the enormous differences in wealth generation capability, and people not wanting to fund others if they can avoid it.'

And who is making such outrageous claims? A geologist? Perhaps a seismologist? Perhaps even just some sort of basic scientist?

From the beginning of the article:

Here is what futurologists Ian Pearson (IP) and Patrick Tucker (PT) think of your ideas.

"Futurologist?" What does it take to call oneself a 'futurologist?'

Well, from Ian Pearson's page [futurizon.com] I'd guess he's got some communication technology background? Or perhaps an author? From his list of achievements:

Ian Pearson has been a full time futurologist since 1991, with a proven track record of around 85% accuracy at the 10 year horizon.

So you could estimate he has a (0.85)^10 or ~19.7% accuracy at the 100 year horizon? Do you get to pick which issues you have to weigh in on? How accurate do you have to be? Are these just yes or no? Multiple choice?

And Patrick Tucker looks to be little more than an author and interviewer [wfs.org] . Sorry for the character assassination or ad hominem attacks but these guys are sci-fi authors, essentially. Reprinting their claims of North America breaking apart in anyway within 100 years is less than prudent.

Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (5, Informative)

russotto (537200) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716440)

ROTFL. They're talking about California breaking off politically, not physically.

Their predictions are still so much bunk, and calling them sci-fi authors smears the good name of actual sci-fi authors.

Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38716490)

The South/Tea Party will break off well before Cali.

Eastern California (conservative) is very different from Western California (liberal) as well.

I think certain states should form providences and have more control, but I have no clue how that would happen smoothly.

Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38716592)

Too bad it would require so many people to move... But I'd prefer to see:

From approx Nevada west - a place for folks who are either atheist or agnostic and don't allow religion to factor into any of their opinions. East of Nevada - a place for theists who want things like pro-life, religion in schools, etc.

Split north / south - one region for people who strongly believe in low taxes, small government, etc - and other tea party type things. The other region for people who believe in full funding for schools, roads, etc., and that rich people aren't magic "job creators", etc.

Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (-1, Flamebait)

sycodon (149926) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716804)

a place for folks who are either atheist or agnostic and don't allow religion to factor into any of their opinions

China, North Korea, whatever other third world backwater communist dictatorships are left.

Ba Bye!

Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (4, Insightful)

polar red (215081) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716834)

low taxes, small government, etc - and other tea party type things

don't fool yourself, they also want to meddle.

Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38716634)

The South/Tea Party will break off well before Cali.

They tried that once. I say they do it again, squash them like a bug.

Eastern California (conservative) is very different from Western California (liberal) as well.

I think certain states should form providences and have more control, but I have no clue how that would happen smoothly.

Like DisneyWorld, a sovereign state in the domain of Florida.

Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (2, Insightful)

Muad'Dave (255648) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716784)

I think certain states should form providences and have more control, but I have no clue how that would happen smoothly.

We had that before - before, as you say, "They tried that once." It's called State's Rights, and the loss of the war of northern aggression assured a strong federal government and the loss of state's individuality.

Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (4, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716814)

You spelled "War of Southern Treason" wrong.

The South started the war, so I fail to see how it could be Northern aggression.

Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38716636)

I agree. If anyone would break away from the US, it would be the southern states. California may be the capital of American liberalism, but they're getting along just fine as is. Still, the idea of anyone breaking away right now is ludicrous. The people who express such opinions are all toothless morons that nobody listens too anyway.

Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38716902)

The people who express such opinions are all toothless morons that nobody listens too anyway.

An awful lot of people listened to Rick Perry.

Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (0, Troll)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716660)

I don't want the tea party / south to break off. They have fucktarded economic and social principals and will quickly devolve into an violent anarchic slave state that will put Mogadishu to shame. And I don't want to move away from the gulf coast to stay American.

Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716746)

I don't want the tea party / south to break off. They have fucktarded economic and social principals and will quickly devolve into an violent anarchic slave state that will put Mogadishu to shame. And I don't want to move away from the gulf coast to stay American.

Most likely, considering the long story of fundamentalist thought, they'll consider themselves to be the true "Americans" and the yankees to have broken off from them. And the yankees will probably think the same way about the south.

Maybe what I'm trying to say is it'll probably turn out a heck of a lot more like "North and South Korea" than "China and Taiwan"

Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716866)

Yes, but when we subsequently invade them and bring Democracy we'll be greeted as liberators.

Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (1)

strength_of_10_men (967050) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716754)

I think certain states should form providences and have more control, but I have no clue how that would happen smoothly.

Don't worry - God's got that covered.

Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716856)

And perhaps this time we'll have the good sense to let them leave. Seriously, what has the South done for us in the last hundred years that was worth fighting and winning a civil war over?

Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (1)

Synerg1y (2169962) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716532)

The latter would be much more hilarious :)

Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (2)

plover (150551) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716604)

If a civil war erupted once before over Southern Secession, I doubt we'll see a repeat over California. Such a breakup would have to be mutual, and California simply has too many natural resources (oil, coasts, winter growing seasons, movie stars) for the rest of the union to want to give them up. No matter how weird they are.

Wait a minute. This isn't a "future prediction", it's the setting of Snow Crash. I knew it seemed familiar.

What's next out of these "futurists"? Rat-things? Cosa Nostra Pizza? Cops who take bribes on Visa cards?

Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (2)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716880)

Visa? That's dumb, obviously it's going to be Bitcoins.

Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716838)

yea it has a very Eurocentric feel too it. Since the British empire broke up and still is. The US must break up as well.
The rest of it was so much ehhh.

Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38716920)

Politics change constantly, they revolve around powerful individuals or groups of individuals most likely, not around geographical regions or ideologies. It's impossible to predict how borders will look a year from now, ten years, let alone one hundred.

If you're going to make predictions about the future, IN WRITING, then take some lessons from Nostradamus, you can interpret his writings in a lot of ways, any time any where and prove them real, or false.

Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (5, Insightful)

Synerg1y (2169962) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716464)

Futurologists don't need a background in science, only an audience.

Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (5, Funny)

plover (150551) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716514)

The difference between a "futurologist" and a "psychic friend" is apparently $1.99 per minute, and you must be over 18 to call.

Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (1)

Baloroth (2370816) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716538)

I'd be a little more generous. More like a 50% accuracy at the 100 year horizon: same as flipping a coin. All the questions are basically "will this happen or not." That far out, it really is just random chance whether they are right or wrong.

Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38716658)

I'd be a little more generous. More like a 50% accuracy at the 100 year horizon: same as flipping a coin. All the questions are basically "will this happen or not." That far out, it really is just random chance whether they are right or wrong.

No it isn't. If there was a 50% chance of any prediction being true then it would be as likely that the earth would be invaded by a race of sentient frying pans from Pluto or that Atlantis has risen from the Oceans and declared war on the Isle of Man as it would be that the landmass of Antarctica still exists. Clearly some predictions are far more than 50% likely to come true and some far less.

Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38716596)

Bah, he's just ripping of FASA now, Shadowrun had half this stuff on paper in 1989.

Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (1)

cod3r_ (2031620) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716642)

The band TOOL.. duh..

Re:Oh, the Horseshit You Will Print! (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716842)

I noticed his predictions were pretty ridiculous. Probably the most obvious one was his 10/10 for fusion in a hundred years. Given the rate of progress, or lack thereof, I don't see it as being certain. Given that it hasn't yet been established as possible, and that it's been 50 years away for at least 50 years, I think it's rather optimistic to consider it a certainty.

I personally believe that we'll eventually get fusion worked out, but right now I don't see any way in which it can be considered certain. Especially with the backlash against fission lately.

We'll go nowhere at this rate. (1, Interesting)

unity100 (970058) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716418)

30 years ago all sorts of stuff was being predicted. space colonies this that. all we ended up has been a widening income/wealth inequality with those amassing wealth doing nothing with that wealth but letting it amass more wealth sitting in the banks. there is no way in hell we will have space elevators, this that, as long as the rich can make more money without making anything. why invest in a space elevator, why you can just let the money sit in hedge funds and let it become more money overnight, without considerable risk ... the only ones who will do these would be new internet-era entrepreneurs and rich boys like the ones who are investing in space x thingies etc now. and no way in hell their numbers and wealth can make these stuff come true in a way that would matter for the public.

hell (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716444)

Check it out - we narrowly averted sopa, there is still pipa. those who command the wealth at the top are not hesitant in preventing anything that would harm their own self-interest. they even went as far to create a law that would break the biggest invention of the recent decades - the internet - for that end.

can you say that you can go to space, elevators and private space industry, space colonies etc, in such an environment ? and dont get me started on the whole patent thing.

100 years from now. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38716534)

The British will have completed their conquest of the world. The British will have the peasants eat the dead, Only the Royals will be allowed to live beyond the age of 30, etc...

Re:We'll go nowhere at this rate. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38716638)

They only thing that has changed in the past 30 years is wealth levels? Get that chip off your shoulder, and you can spend some time in the real world with the rest of us.

Re:We'll go nowhere at this rate. (5, Insightful)

MetalliQaZ (539913) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716770)

30 years ago all sorts of stuff was being predicted. space colonies this that. all we ended up has been a widening income/wealth inequality with those amassing wealth doing nothing with that wealth but letting it amass more wealth sitting in the banks. there is no way in hell we will have space elevators, this that, as long as the rich can make more money without making anything. why invest in a space elevator, why you can just let the money sit in hedge funds and let it become more money overnight, without considerable risk ... the only ones who will do these would be new internet-era entrepreneurs and rich boys like the ones who are investing in space x thingies etc now. and no way in hell their numbers and wealth can make these stuff come true in a way that would matter for the public.

You have such a deep misunderstanding of the real world, I'm surprised you can manage to get food into your mouth to survive. The article summary seems to have triggered your "I AM THE 99%" response. However you don't seem to understand the nature of wealth. People like you sit back and complain that the rich have all their money in the bank, so there isn't any left for you. The reality is that weathy people invest their money to remain wealthy. What the hell do you think a hedge fund is? Like most investments, it puts the money to work.

If a space elevator could ever be made profitably, those kinds of funds are the ones that would invest. Poor, aimless, unmotivated fools will never make it happen. No such venture was ever done for charity. Columbus was sponsored by the Portuguese crown in a search for wealth in trade routes. The Apollo program was sponsored by the USA so as to not fall behind in the USSR and risk the cold war. A space elevator represents a huge opportunity for wealth generation. You don't think greed would make it happen if it was possible? You're just plain wrong.

-d

Temples of Syrinx (4, Funny)

tedgyz (515156) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716432)

We will find a guitar, but it will be destroyed by the priests, declaring it is a "silly whim".

Re:Temples of Syrinx (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38716466)

Only if you sell it to them using Paypal.

Re:Temples of Syrinx (1)

SJHillman (1966756) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716520)

Attention all planets of the Solar Federation, the RIAA has assumed control.

Re:Temples of Syrinx (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38716564)

RE: your title:

In a few years: "Syrinx? Is that the voice from the iPhone?"

Re:Temples of Syrinx (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38716614)

Rush, 2112!

Bad day... Wow, I needed that!

Thanks!!!

I call Jetsons (1)

TheSpoom (715771) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716458)

It's like shenanigans but for future predictions beyond the thirty year mark, which are bullshit by definition.

Re:I call Jetsons (1)

dougmc (70836) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716666)

By definition? Um, no.

Predictions that are for a future 30+ years now are often wrong, yes, but they're not wrong "by definition". (And occasionally they're right!)

California wants to split off (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716470)

CYA!

( like the feds would ever let that happen anyway )

Re:California wants to split off (4, Insightful)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716524)

From a canuck pov, California is a lot like Quebec. Both have large debts, highly self-inflated opinions of themselves, and have a highly convoluted parasitic nature with both the federal government and other states/provinces. If they went up and left, they'd be in a crash bankruptcy within 2 years, and be begging to come back, as their own entitlement programs would cause them to collapse from within. As it stands now, their own entitlement programs are causing them to collapse from within.

Re:California wants to split off (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38716664)

Oops. Your conservative is showing.

California is the 8th largest economy in the world. Period. It would be a world power on it's own.
California would do quite well on it's own given it's natural resources and it's western US shipping ports.
California sees less return on federal dollars than is taken in taxes. (Who's the parasite, again?)
California's population and land size give it country sized problems with state sized control and funds.

Re:California wants to split off (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38716854)

Oops. Your ignorance is showing.

California is the 8th largest economy in the world. Period. It would be a world power on it's own.

Like France, Italy and Russia?

California would do quite well on it's own given it's natural resources and it's western US shipping ports.

I'll grant you that the southern California ports are among the best run in the world. Other than that, California's natural resource development has been stalled thanks to tree huggers.

California sees less return on federal dollars than is taken in taxes. (Who's the parasite, again?)

You sure about that? Hint: look at all the Federal expenditures in California, including welfare.

California's population and land size give it country sized problems with state sized control and funds.

You think its government is exceptionally great because it manages to address "country-sized problems" while being only a state? Fact check: California is 3rd in area, barely beating Montana, so at least part of your statement is wrong. Fact check: in our federal system, many of the problems present in California due to the population are handled at the Federal level.

Re:California wants to split off (3, Funny)

ScentCone (795499) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716912)

But the real question is, does California have what it takes to correct its massive apostrophe abuse problem? Or is that one inflicted on them by the Feds?

Re:California wants to split off (2, Interesting)

Baloroth (2370816) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716918)

California sees less return on federal dollars than is taken in taxes.

Really? You mean the government can't give out more money to the states than it takes in in taxes... oh right, I suppose it does that all the time.

California has a whopping 12.5% unemployment, and managed to double their state spending in 10 years. Let me repeat that: double, from 1998 to 2008. One does not have to be a conservative to realize that California has a spending problem. Everyone there realizes it. One of the highest tax rates in the country, and they still can't find enough money.

Re:California wants to split off (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38716738)

But California and Quebec have considerable resources (California oil, Quebec hydropower). Collapse is all but assured for California, but as long as the northeast United States refuses to build new power plants Quebec will be... ok.

Re:California wants to split off (4, Interesting)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716756)

No. Actually.

California is having budget issues mostly because the federal government is raping it, so that its wealth can be redistributed to Republican owned southern and midwestern states. Californians pay far more in federal tax than they receive back in federal benefits. If California was on its own and took those federal taxes itself, its debt would be gone almost immediately.

Re:California wants to split off (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38716806)

Y'know, the fact that you're so grossly wrong about California makes me think you're just as misinformed about Quebec.

Economically, California is doing fine, and no, it doesn't have a problem with spending. It has a problem with tax collection. See, it has this old proposition that was done by the "public" to artificially limit how property taxes are applied.

If they seceded, they'd have to get past that self-imposed hamstringing, but they'd have a relatively high amount of slack, given how they pay more into the federal coffers than they get back, so even with the replacement spending, they'd be rather more flexible.

Re:California wants to split off (1)

mr1911 (1942298) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716582)

The feds don't have to worry. California is in worse fiscal condition than the Federal government -- they can't afford to break off.

In the event they do decide to break off, I am the first to bid them good riddance.

Re:California wants to split off (5, Informative)

Kenja (541830) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716668)

Actually, California gets less back from the federal government then we pay out. We would be in much better financial shape if we didn't have to subsidize other states.

Re:California wants to split off (2)

hawguy (1600213) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716860)

Actually, California gets less back from the federal government then we pay out. We would be in much better financial shape if we didn't have to subsidize other states.

This infographic says that California gets back 78 cents of every dollar paid to the federal government. Only 7 states have a lower ratio.

http://visualizingeconomics.com/2010/02/17/federal-taxes-paidreceived-for-each-state/ [visualizingeconomics.com]

No, you wouldn't be better off (1)

MikeRT (947531) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716928)

California's problems are first and foremost political. There is no political will to actually clean up your state's problems with spending too much money. You have a prison guard union that has managed to make generous six figure salaries the norm, not the exception, for its employees and California has the largest prison population in the US--even compared to states like Texas and Florida which rival it in population size. You spend more on average for public schools than most of the union, but have little to show for it compared to many other states with equivalent wealth production capacity.

Why? Because your state is a microcosm of the mentality that is crushing the federal government. The complete and utter inability to say "no, you've already gotten enough and aren't getting anymore."

Re:California wants to split off (1, Insightful)

vlm (69642) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716650)

( like the feds would ever let that happen anyway )

What if all the middle class moved out, leaving no one left in CA but the illegals and some very rich folks. Basically it would be much like Cancun, a Mexican village with a bunch of resorts on the coast and the vacation homes of a couple rich people. I could see it happening because its not far from it now.

Now we'd probably demand some "foreign" military bases... Also I don't think we'd give up seattle without a fight, need a pacific ocean seaport.

Wait until after the really big city leveling earthquake and we're given the choice of giving it back to .mx in exchange for a bunch of oil, or keeping a majority spanish speaking state out of rebellion with no oil and a trillion dollar price tag to rebuild after the earthquake.

Another possible crisis point would probably be when the aquifer empties in CA, that means no more agriculture.

What happens when Vegas runs out of water will be another interesting crisis point, a lot depends on refugees evacuating east or evacuating west.

Either that, or peak oil declines and narco-state politics finally completely collapse .mx, so we end up taking over .mx as a humanitarian gesture if nothing else, leading to new "US States". Basically a really large Puerto Rico.

One way or another CA and .mx are politically merging "relatively soon" like within my kids lifetime.

Re:California wants to split off (2)

Kenja (541830) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716694)

What if all the middle class moved out

Both of them?

Re:California wants to split off (1)

gnick (1211984) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716882)

Also I don't think we'd give up seattle without a fight, need a pacific ocean seaport.

Unless there's a MAJOR seismic event causing massive geometric shift, I don't think that a California cessation would have much effect on Seattle remaining within the US political boundaries... It's something like 500 miles away.

Predictions... (4, Interesting)

SJHillman (1966756) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716494)

50 years ago, they were predicting flying cars, space travel, holographic TVs, etc by y2k but few of the things they predicted came true, and even of those that did most of them are not accessible to Joe Average. However, look at the one big thing most of them missed: The Internet and the consumer microcomputer revolution.

Predicting the somewhat distant future is great and all, but I'm sure there will be something huge that we never see coming and once it's there, we'll wonder how we ever lived without it.

Re:Predictions... (3, Funny)

bkmoore (1910118) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716548)

"I'm sure that in 1985 plutonium is available in every corner drugstore, but in 1955 it's a little hard to come by. " - Doc Brown ... You forgot the atomic reactor in every home.

Re:Predictions... (1)

Sperbels (1008585) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716818)

You mean you don't have one?

Ubiquitous Wi-Fi/Energy (1)

jomama717 (779243) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716610)

This isn't really that huge, and we are clearly on the road to this already, but I think our children will struggle to imagine a time when you could only have a wi-fi connection in your house or at a business.

I think the huge breakthrough will be cheap renewable energy, but it will be some unforeseen insight/technology that brings it, and not anything that we are likely to predict today...like no grid, but everyone has with them at all times a near endless source of energy that powers their surroundings. Energy could kind of follow the same path that computing has, from large, expensive, centralized to tiny, cheap, and distributed.

Re:Predictions... (1)

Synerg1y (2169962) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716616)

Futurists follow a common theme in their predictions:

1. take something that exists
2. watch some sci-fi
3. combine the 2
4. make a prediction

Thus they can't ever predict what's not there, nor can they predict inventions because they aren't inventors and don't specialize in any field.

Personally, I'm stilling waiting on somebody to invent the lightsaber [youtube.com] , anyone?

My predications. (5, Funny)

Kenja (541830) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716522)

Prediction 1 : I'll be dead.
Prediction 2 : Don't care. See prediction 1.

Re:My predications. (4, Funny)

mr1911 (1942298) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716624)

Apparently you missed the prediction about all naysayers being cryogenically suspended and revived later as a slave class.

You will care. Oh how you will care.

Cryogenics (1)

PseudonymousBraveguy (1857734) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716930)

Ob xkcd [xkcd.com]

California wants out? Awesome! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38716530)

'There are some indications already that California wants to split off...people not wanting to fund others if they can avoid it.

Where do I sign to discharge these deadbeats? Count me worried about federal bailouts of their bloated pension funds, etc.

We know one thing for sure. (4, Interesting)

fsterman (519061) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716540)

That there will be an ironic post about 20 top predictions from 100 years prior and snarky commentators will smugly wonder how we took any of this seriously.

Re:We know one thing for sure. (1)

snarkh (118018) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716830)

But the best part is that this technology is available today!

Interesting......WRONG! But interesting... (-1)

raydobbs (99133) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716556)

Of course, if you listen to the Glen Beck crowd - we will be fighting the race wars, losing out to the feral mud people, and women's rights will cause the downfall of mankind. Oh, and you'd better start buying gold now - as when money is worthless and you will be eating people to survive; you need to protect your portfolio.

Re:Interesting......WRONG! But interesting... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38716734)

Why do we always have to go there? We get it, you hate Beck and everything he stands for. This thread has zero to do with him. Please learn the meaning of "off topic".

My prediction (1)

jd2112 (1535857) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716568)

99.99% of the people reading this article will be dead in 100 years.

Re:My prediction (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38716812)

99.99% of the people reading this article will be dead in 100 years.

It would be interesting to calculate what percentage of readership would still be alive in 100 years time. Estimating (conservatively) that 1% of readers are 20 years old, and 1% of those would live to be 120, then that would be 0.01% of readers still alive. Crikey! So 99.99% would be dead - if that figure was a guess, it was a good one!

Re:My prediction (1)

Nethemas the Great (909900) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716864)

Untrue. One of the predictions was humanity becoming a race of cyborgs and essentially immortal.

California Secede? Unlikely (1)

damn_registrars (1103043) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716572)

You are calling the wrong secession movement, there. California isn't likely to leave. Much more likely is Texas. And if Texas does leave, I'll happily be here telling them not to let the door hit them on the way out.

And to have fun building that wall they've been wanting for so long, on their own.

Re:California Secede? Unlikely (0)

thomasw_lrd (1203850) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716640)

Thank God I'm a Native Texan. At least then I'll be able to move there, and get out of the United States of Fucking America.

Re:California Secede? Unlikely (1)

damn_registrars (1103043) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716722)

Thank God I'm a Native Texan. At least then I'll be able to move there, and get out of the United States of Fucking America.

So, you're not living there currently why?

Re:California Secede? Unlikely (1)

thomasw_lrd (1203850) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716796)

I live in Arkansas, so I figure that they will just join the Republic of Texas, and I'm good either way.

Re:California Secede? Unlikely (4, Interesting)

blair1q (305137) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716822)

Texas isn't going anywhere, either.

People who want to get elected in Texas use that to cadge votes, because it works, but once they find out you can't defend a nation with a posse carrying six-guns any more and the amount it will raise their taxes to become a real military power with a full Army, Air Force, Coast Guard (370 miles of coastline in the smugglingest water in America), and Border Patrol (1250 miles of border with Mexico, over 60% of the whole border; plus 1400 miles with New Mexico, Okalahoma, Arkansas, and Louisiana). Duplicating the rest of the functions of the federal government won't be a cakewalk, either, and don't pretend they'll just let that all fall flat. Economies of scale mean that being a part of the entire nation is cheaper than going it alone. And Texas' physical scale makes it more expensive to administer, not less. Throw in the added expense of commerce across borders, and no protections against tarriffs from the commerce clause, and businesses in the state doing any business out of state will be crippled.

And Texas is hardly monolithic. Split it off from the U.S. and the next thing that happens is that West Texas will insist on separating entirely from East Texas, and East Texas would be just fine with that. So there's only so far the political fixers in the state are willing to take the issue beyond claptrap at campaign rallies.

It's theater, nothing more.

Pipe dreams (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38716580)

By 2050 most of the humans will be dead because of lack of medicines to cure resistant bacteria.

So come on /., put forth YOUR predictions! (5, Insightful)

boristdog (133725) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716588)

I predict there will be unrest in the middle east.

Re:So come on /., put forth YOUR predictions! (3, Funny)

martas (1439879) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716728)

How absurd! Next you're going to suggest that religious disagreements will be a source of conflict and unrest in the world!

One currency? Bad idea even if possible. (3, Insightful)

Beryllium Sphere(tm) (193358) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716648)

Research "Optimal Currency Area". Try to have a single currency across a heterogeneous region, and you get a train wreck like the Euro.

People aren't going to give up their native languages, either.

Re:One currency? Bad idea even if possible. (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716828)

People aren't going to give up their native languages, either.

"The South and California" is much more likely to break off into "North Mexico" than it is into "Tea Party Land" or even "The republican party of quislingville" or whatever.

Re:One currency? Bad idea even if possible. (1)

mark-t (151149) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716922)

People aren't going to give up their native languages, either.

It's not like it will just happen all of a sudden... although I think it's going to take much more than a hundred years. Probably more like a thousand. Although I would not dare predict which languages they will be speaking. About 2000 years ago, it looked like the entire civilized world was going to one day be speaking Latin.

Prediction (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38716652)

Politicians will still be backstabbing scumbags.

Still Waiting... (2)

SuperCharlie (1068072) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716670)

Where are the flying cars.. I was told there would be flying cars..

The worst predictions IMO (5, Interesting)

martas (1439879) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716692)

"11. Eighty per cent of the world will have gay marriage (Likelihood 8/10)"

Seriously? We have so much widespread extremism in the world that you probably couldn't get a majority of countries to agree that milk is white, and they think this'll get done in a measly 90 years?

"12. California will lead the break-up of the US (Dev 2) (Likelihood 8/10)"

The US has survived a civil war, a depression that makes this recession look like good times, corporate tyranny that even today seems unthinkable, they have the balls to call this that likely? Look, I'm not saying it can't happen -- it definitely can. But given how (increasingly) inter-dependent and weak the states are (compared to federal gov't powers), this prediction is brave to say the least.

"13. Space elevators will make space travel cheap and easy (Ahdok) (Likelihood 8/10)"

To be fair he says it won't be so cheap that the average person can afford it, but I think even suggesting that it could be done within 100 years is again brave. There are just so many obstacles that need to be overcome to make this happen; it could even turn out to be theoretically impossible to create materials that would be necessary.

"16. Deserts will become tropical forests (jim300) (Likelihood 7/10)"

More like 1/10. Where's the water coming from? Barring a breakthrough in energy tech that would allow us to cheaply distill sea water, it's never gonna happen (read: it's never gonna happen). The trend today is pretty much the opposite, and I don't see that trend reversing anytime soon in light of increasingly aggressive farming practices and global warming.

I'd love to be wrong though.

Re:The worst predictions IMO (1)

thomasw_lrd (1203850) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716824)

"16. Deserts will become tropical forests (jim300) (Likelihood 7/10)"

More like 1/10. Where's the water coming from? Barring a breakthrough in energy tech that would allow us to cheaply distill sea water, it's never gonna happen (read: it's never gonna happen). The trend today is pretty much the opposite, and I don't see that trend reversing anytime soon in light of increasingly aggressive farming practices and global warming.

I'd love to be wrong though.

I think that's where global warming, and the melting ice caps comes in. When most everywhere else is underwater, the deserts should be getting plenty of rain to make them tropical.

Re:The worst predictions IMO (1)

Tsingi (870990) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716886)

17. Marriage will be replaced by an annual contract

It's just too good of an idea from the male perspective to ever actually come to fruition.

Love your sig.

Re:The worst predictions IMO (3, Interesting)

vlm (69642) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716906)

The US has survived ... a depression that makes this recession look like good times

Check your numbers... the current depression has much worse numbers across the board than the G.D. Crazy, but true. The only numbers that are better are the numbers that are no longer comparable due to redefinition, such as endless redefinition of the unemployment rate, etc.

"Young People", defined as not living in the nursing home, have this strange idea that America in the 30s was as bad as Germany in the late 20s or late 40s, or Argentina for the past... century it seems. The GD just wasn't that bad, in fact in many ways, it was much better than now. Yes 1/4 of the population was un/under employed, just like now. Yes lots of people lost their homes, just like now. Yes excessive debt destroyed uncountable companies, just like now. Yes millions could not afford food and went to soup kitchens, just like now except we use technology and send them to super-walmart with EBT cards or whatever they're called. Yes we lost a lot of farmland and manufacturing jobs, but not as much as now. Yes fascism and quisling-ism was spreading, just like now. Yes plenty of blaming troubles on immigrants and minorities, just like now. Yes plenty of warmongering to jumpstart the economy, just like now.

For political reasons we can not admit it, but history will look back on this era as the second great depression.

I know the answer to that (2, Insightful)

Hentes (2461350) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716700)

Hundred years from know futurulogist will write books predicting the same things as those in the article are "just around the corner" and will be available in less than another 100 years.

Obvious One... (5, Funny)

mykepredko (40154) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716742)

100 years from now, Linux will be 5 years from taking over the desktop.

myke

+100 and the exponential bias (4, Insightful)

hcs_$reboot (1536101) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716748)

Retrospectively,
- in the eighties AIDS was said to be cured by 2000
- in the seventies nuclear plants were created, expecting all the technical uncertainties to be solved by 2000
not mentioning studies, novels, sci-fi movies that made an unsuccessful attempt to describe a world in a 30~50 years future
And they want to predict the world in 100 years from now?

sounds like cyberpunk 2020 (1)

afabbro (33948) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716758)

There are some indications already that California wants to split off and such pressures tend to build over time.

This reads like a bad RPG supplement.

slashdot is (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38716776)

going down the tubes, isn't it?

Flying cars? (1)

punker (320575) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716800)

Where are the flying cars?! We were promised flying cars!

Re:Flying cars? (1)

AdrianKemp (1988748) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716888)

http://www.terrafugia.com/ [terrafugia.com]

(I haven't kept in the loop on it, but they built one that works and I think they even got all the appropriate green lights to actually make them)

Some good news ... (1)

Kittenman (971447) | more than 2 years ago | (#38716802)

In the 70s (I was around) "they" were predicting that we'd be out of oil by the turn of the century.

2112 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38716820)

I think people forget that 100 years from now... we'll all have been dead for about 99.5 years.

First Turning (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38716884)

In 2112, we will most likely be early into the First Turning of the saeculum after the next one.

Basically, we'll be in the future version of the late 1940s/early 1950s and we'll have recently won the future version of WW2.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...