×

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!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

513 comments

IN SOVIET RUSSIA (-1, Offtopic)

IN SOVIET RUSSIA (621411) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785468)

We have 2012 predictions for 5!

Re:IN SOVIET RUSSIA (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785485)

Bunny you ignorant slut. Go drop some more beer.

~bv~ ROFL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785492)

Hey now, only one bottle broke. I salved the other 11 just an hour ago. :)

Re:IN SOVIET RUSSIA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785560)

No, you fool! It's "In Soviet Russia, technology predictions put up Mike Langberg!"

People like you give Soviet Russia a bad name.

Well, OK, it's mostly the people like Stalin who do that, but still....

Re:IN SOVIET RUSSIA (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785589)

Mine was legit, calm down. Yours is fine too, but I was rushing and the first thing to reverse that I saw was the subject line. It's all good.

-bv :)

Hmm (3, Insightful)

altaic (559466) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785474)

I wonder why all the articles which hold predictions are "bold."

Re:Hmm (5, Insightful)

Zeinfeld (263942) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785510)

From his 1992 'predictions': Direct-broadcast satellite television, which didn't exist in 1992, is now a certified hit,

I had a direct broadcast satellite in '92, so did over a million people in the UK. Predicting the launch in the US is hardly that impressive.

This years predictions include the Tivo like PVR becomming ubiquitous...

The Art of Cunniligus (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785479)

Hey, I have a lot of respect for all you guys who like to eat pussy because there are too few of you out there. And I'm not the only woman who says this. Furthermore, some of you guys who are giving it the old college try are not doing too well, so maybe this little lesson will help you out. When a woman finds a man who gives good head, she's found a treasure she's not going to let go of him too quickly. This is one rare customer and she knows it. She won't even tell her girlfriends about it or that guy will become the most popular man in town. So, remember, most guys can fuck, and those who can usually do it satisfactorily, but the guy who gives good head, he's got it made.
Most women are shy about their bodies. Even if you've got the world's most gorgeous woman in bed with you, she's going to worry about how you like her body. Tell her it's beautiful, tell her which parts you like best, tell her anything, but get her to trust you enough to let you down between her legs. Now stop and look at what you see.
Beautiful, isn't it?
There is nothing that makes a woman more unique than her pussy.

I know. I've seen plenty of them. They come in all different sizes, colors and shapes; some are tucked inside like a little girl's cunnie and some have thick luscious lips that come out to greet you. Some are nested in brushes of fur and others are covered with transparent fuzz. Appreciate your woman's unique qualities and tell her what makes her special. Women are a good deal more verbal than men, especially during love-making. They also respond more to verbal love, which means, the more you talk to her, the easier it will be to get her off. So all the time you're petting and stroking her beautiful pussy, talk to her about it.
Now look at it again.
Gently pull the lips apart and look at her inner lips, even lick them if you want to. Now spread the tops of her pussy up until you can find her clit. Women have clits in all different sizes, just like you guys have different sized cocks. It doesn't mean a thing as far as her capacity for orgasm. All it means is more of her is hidden underneath her foreskin.
Whenever you touch a woman's pussy, make sure your finger is wet. You can lick it or moisten it with juices from inside her. Be sure, by all means, to wet it before you touch her clit because it doesn't have any juices of its own and it's extremely sensitive. Your finger will stick to it if it's dry and that hurts. But you don't want to touch her clit anyway. You have to work up to that. Before she becomes aroused, her clit is too delicate to be handled.
Approach her pussy slowly. Women, even more so than men, love to be teased. The inner part of her thigh is her most tender spot. Lick it, kiss it, make designs on it with the tip of your tongue. Come dangerously close to her pussy, then float away. Make her anticipate it.
Now lick the crease where her leg joins her pussy. Nuzzle your face into her bush. Brush your lips over her slit without pressing down on it to further excite her. After you've done this to the point where your lady is bucking up from her seat and she's straining to get more of you closer to her, then put your lips right on top of her slit.
Kiss her, gently, then harder. Now use your tongue to separate her pussy lips and when she opens up, run your tongue up and down between the layers of pussy flesh. Gently spread her legs more with your hands. Everything you do with a woman you're about to eat must be done gently.
Tongue-fuck her. This feels divine. It also teases the hell out of her because by now she wants some attention given to her clit. Check it out. See if her clit has gotten hard enough to peek out of its covering. If so, lick it. If you can't see it, it might still be waiting for you underneath. So bring your tongue up to the top of her slit and feel for her clit. You may barely experience its presence. But even if you can't feel the tiny pearl, you can make it rise by licking the skin that covers it. Lick hard now and press into her skin.
Gently pull the pussy lips away and flick your tongue against the clit, hood covered or not. Do this quickly. This should cause her legs to shudder. When you sense she's getting up there toward orgasm, make your lips into an O and take the clit into your mouth. Start to suck gently and watch your lady's face for her reaction. If she can handle it, begin to suck harder. If she digs it, suck even harder. Go with her. If she lifts her pelvis into the air with the tension of her rising orgasm, move with her, don't fight her. Hang on, and keep your hot mouth on her clit. Don't let go. That's what she'll be saying too: 'Don't stop. Don't ever stop!'
There's a reason for that - most men stop too soon. Just like with cock sucking, this is something worth learning about and worth learning to do well. I know a man who's a lousy fuck, simply lousy, but he can eat pussy like nobody I know and he never has trouble getting a date. Girls are falling all over him.
But back to your pussy eating session...There's another thing you can do to intensify your woman's pleasure. You can finger-fuck her while she's enjoying your clit-licking talents. Before, during or after. She'll really like it. In addition to the erogenous zones surrounding her clit, a woman has another extremely sensitive area at the roof of her vagina. This is what you rub up against when you're fucking her. Well, since your cock is pretty far away from your mouth, your fingers will have to do the fucking.
Take two fingers. One is too skinny and three is too wide and therefore can't get deep enough. Make sure they're wet so you don't irritate her skin. Slide them inside, slowly at first, then a little faster. Fuck her with them rhythmically. Speed up only when she does. Listen to her breathing.
She'll let you know what to do. If you're sucking her clit and finger-fucking her at the same time, you're giving her far more stimulation than you would be giving her with your cock alone. So you can count on it that she's getting high on this. If there's any doubt, check her out for symptoms. Each woman is unique. You may have one whose nipples get hard when she's excited or only when she's having an orgasm. Your girl might flush red or begin to tremble. Get to know her symptoms and you'll be a more sensitive lover.
When she starts to have an orgasm, for heaven's sakes, don't let go of that clit. Hang in there for the duration. When she starts to come down from the first orgasm, press your tongue along the underside of the clit, leaving your lips covering the top. Move your tongue in and out of her cunt. If your fingers are inside, move them a little too, gently though, things are extremely sensitive just now.
If you play your cards right, you'll get some multiple orgasms this way. A woman stays excited for a full hour after she's had an orgasm. Do you realize the full impact of that information? The potential? One woman was clocked at 56 orgasms at one sitting. Do you know what effect you would have on a woman you gave 56 orgasms to? She'd be yours as long as you wanted her.
The last advice I have for you is this: After you've made her come, made her your slave by giving her the best head she's ever had, don't leave her alone just yet. Talk to her, stroke her body, caress her breasts. Keep making love to her quietly until she's come all the way down. A man can get off and go to sleep in the same breath and feel no remorse, no sense of loss. But a woman by nature requires some sensitivity from her lover in those first few moments after sex.
Oral sex can be the most exciting sexual experiences you can have. But it's what you make it. Take your time, practice often, pay attention to your lover's signals, and most of all, enjoy yourself.
The G-Spot
This does exist. And in over half of the women out there, it works better than anything else you can do to cause a strong, prolonged orgasm. The original name is the Grafenberg spot, after a doctor, Earnest Grafenberg, who documented the area (which may have been known by people here and there throughout history) in the fifties.
This "spot" is a small "mound" of tissue inside the vagina, between a penny and quarter in size, which responds to being pressed upon. It's almost certainly not the skenes glands, (which are located around the urethra, which is behind the G-spot area), as has been suggested by a few people. In fact, the G-Spot is the tissue in that raised area of the vagina, which has a higher concentration of sexual nerves, and produces hormones similar to those made by the male's prostate gland.
A sort of map to the area -- Imagine your lover lying on her back, legs spread. Your position is between her legs. You would slide a finger inside her vagina, palm up. With your finger straight back, middle finger is best, you would curve it toward yourself, gently, as if you were gesturing to someone to "come here". In doing so, the area you press on should be pretty near her "G-Spot" area. If you know enough to follow the urethra (the tube that leads from the bladder to where the pee comes out), along the inside of her vagina, you may feel a slight swelling (if she's excited) at the point where the g-spot is.
She must be excited, especially if either you or she is new to the g-spot, for the g-spot to have any real effect at all. It's not the ideal area for getting your lover aroused.
But when she is excited, this area (more often than not) is the best way to bring her to orgasm. You work your way back to it gradually, teasing her (typically, this works best) with your fingers, slowly and gently. It's easier to hit the right area with two fingers, but this may not be comfortable for her, depending on how "tight" she is at that moment. When you have your fingers around the right area, try gently pressing, not too quickly. The movement should be fairly rhythmic. It's typically best if you're licking her clitoris (or near it, depending on the woman) at the same time...don't make a big deal out of the "quest", this will often make her feel self-conscious, or distracted. The licking should seem to be the primary activity.
When you find the right area, she should respond by getting more excited. Most of the vagina's inside surface isn't really that sexually sensitive, believe it or not...most of the excitement of randomly inserting fingers is more psychological than from the actual stimulation.
While more complicated techniques work with some women, some of the time, the best basic technique, upon finding the g-spot, is to continue to slowly, rhythmically press on it, while licking her clitoris (for a few women, the labia (lips) are sensitive to licking, too).
This should cause her to build up to an orgasm.
A G-Spot orgasm is different (always, when it works at all) than any other kind women have. It is possible, with some women, to have different qualities and kinds of orgasms from vaginal, clitoral, anal, and even breast stimulation...but with other women, those kinds of orgasms are all pretty much the same. But the G-Spot orgasm not only feels different; it also causes her body to react in a different way.
First, it often causes a "push out" orgasm. The area around, or "above" (farther inside, that is) your fingers seems to swell up or to contract toward the opening of her vagina.
If you find the right combination of pushing back when this happens, and slacking off to let it push out, you can cause (in perhaps half of the women) her orgasm to continue happening, long after normal ones would have subsided. In some women you can even keep her at a "plateau" (raised level) of sexual excitement, like a prolonged orgasm (or a little less than one) afterward, building up to an even bigger climax.
That brings me to another important point; G-Spot orgasms sometimes causes a huge amount (relatively speaking) of lubrication (juices, wetness)...far more than even the most excited woman gets from "conventional" stimulation.
When that extra wetness combines with the push-out orgasm, you get actual ejaculation...like a guy, but much better tasting. The built up juices can shoot out in such volume that you, or she, may be afraid that she lost control of her bladder. That is (almost always) not what happened. The fear that she peed can be enhanced by the fact that the urethra is behind the g-spot, so that in rare cases the woman can sometimes get the feeling that she needs to pee, even though she does not.
In reality, in both men and women, enough sexual excitement prevents peeing, unless you try really hard. This is a built-in reflex, because urine is something of a spermicide. The "pee hard-on" that men get in the morning is partially his body taking advantage of this reflex, to keep him from accidentally wetting the bed with the urine that built up while he was sleeping.
Taste
Anyone who likes, say, coffee or beer should have no room to complain about the way most women taste. No, I don't mean it tastes like coffee or beer, genius...I mean that beer and coffee are, at best, acquired tastes...they are not naturally pleasant to a human being, no matter how much your addiction to one or both has convinced you otherwise. Most people, whether they remember it or not, had to learn to like the taste of beer/coffee, and had the desire to be Like the Adults to help them along. Well, I'd list taking pleasure in cunnilingus above drinking addictive beverages on the list of things that prove maturity. Aside from that, there's the fact that many people who give it an honest try genuinely enjoy the taste/smell.

All present and accounted for -- always. (2, Funny)

ejdmoo (193585) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785480)

Great...can't skip work and go on the Duff Factory tour...

unless I leave my cell phone at home :)

Been there, done that. (3, Interesting)

Walterk (124748) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785538)

I'm already always online on my IM services, but always in the N/A or away state.. People never know if I'm actually there, unless I talk back. I'm omnipresent, just not an accountant.. or something.

My prediction... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785484)

RMS will still not have bathed.

Presence (5, Insightful)

Trusty Penfold (615679) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785488)

All present and accounted for -- always. ...
Family, friends and co-workers will be able to instantly see where you are,


I think this will come much sooner and, by 2012, will be gone again once everyone realises how bloody awful it is.

Re:Presence (5, Informative)

bmetz (523) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785617)

AT&T's mMode has this -- it's called friend finder. *IF* you want someone to see you, you add them to a list and they can look on their phone and see something to the effect of 'Bob is at the corner of Atlantic and Congress Ave.' I think it's only based on which tower you're closest too, but it's a very good start.

Re:Presence (5, Insightful)

archen (447353) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785619)

Exactly my thoughts.

My boss offered to give me a cell phone (me being the resident "computer guy"). After watching the head of maitenance for half a day with his cell phone (everyone calling with every problem ever 5 minutes) I said no thanks. Then again I'm biased because I don't like cell phones in the first place. It seems more and more like people are never "alone". I don't want phone calls when I'm driving (when I blast music so loud I doubt I'd hear it ring anyway), I don't want calls when I'm on a walk, I don't want calls when I'm eating, or out doing something. I could turn off the ringer, but then again I'd just never have it on at all if that were the case. Most of the time I'd just like my time to MYSELF.

and the world changes/ends on Dec 21st (3)

Bogatyr (69476) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785489)

At least according to Terence McKenna [bluehoney.org].

Re:and the world changes/ends on Dec 21st (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785517)

That's really gonna suck. I mean... really. We've only got two Popes after the current one left as well. I guess all these predictions are coming together.

Re:and the world changes/ends on Dec 21st (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785570)

I like the way he quotes himself.

Re:and the world changes/ends on Dec 21st (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785635)

Ray Kurzweil predicts that intelligence will break out from its organic roots in the not so distant future.

Maybe the luddites had some good points?

only 1 terabyte ?? (3, Interesting)

SpiritC (163392) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785490)

from the longhorn story earlier:
"Enderle said the new file system will also function efficiently with hard drives holding at least one terabyte of data. That's 1,000 gigabytes, or well over 1,000 compressed movies, or more than 700,000 novels the size of "War and Peace." Such drives are expected to hit the market by 2004."
i hope 8 years more can give a couple more megs to hds ;)

2012?!?! (5, Funny)

MrP- (45616) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785491)

These predictions wont turn out.. I mean, we all know the world ends in 2012, right?? The Mayans say so, and so does the X-Files.. We're all doomed!

mod parent up!!! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785536)

seriously, that was so fucking funny

whoever moderated that as overrated must have made a mistake and meant underrated.. its ok, ill just metamoderate you to hell.

Re:2012?!?! (2, Funny)

Evil Dead (179883) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785577)

To be more precise, it will end on Dec. 21, 2012. Even more suprising is the fact that everyone I work with finally gets our additional vacation time on...Dec 21, 2012! I think our CEO is in league with those Mayans, X-Philes, and the Aliens. We're all doomed to have the world end without getting to use our additional time! Damn aliens...

Re:2012?!?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785641)

The world ends sooner that 2012 according to this [yahoo.com] article.

Speech Recognition (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785494)

The question is how sophisticated our voice recognition will be in 2012. Asking a car how far away a destination is really isn't that hard, and that is only a few years off. To me this just seems like a beefed up command line interpreter-- albeit alot more user friendly. But is that really true voice recognition? Shouldn't voice recognition imply that the computer can pass the turing test? If that's the case, I think that we are a long way off from computers that we can actually communicate with like human beings.

Re:Speech Recognition (5, Insightful)

BitHive (578094) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785608)

What does speech recognition have to do with the Turing test? I will consider speech recognition to be a solved problem when computers can take dictation with the same error rate as a native speaker. They don't have to be able to understand what is said--that's a different problem altogether.

Finally, we can talk to our computers. (5, Funny)

Sophrosyne (630428) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785496)

.....what gives? I talk to my computer all the time..I guess I'm ahead of the times.

Re:Finally, we can talk to our computers. (1)

Walterk (124748) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785520)

This is usually a big sign of advanced insanity. Please consult your local shrink.

Re:Finally, we can talk to our computers. (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785636)

I talk to mine as well. The speech recognition isn't that bad for windows, maybe it will be out for linux by 2012.

I want my computer to talk back to me.

Mayan predictions for the year 2012 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785498)

Their calendar runs out in 2012, and that means an end to the world! Yes, it's true, I heard it on Art Bell.

This sounds familiar (1)

Huw (234808) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785499)

You'll no longer be surprised to get a call from the repair center at Sears or Maytag saying your washing machine is using too much hot water and needs adjustment -- information the washing machine has sent through the Net, without any action of your part, back to the factory where it was built.


Sounds familiar. A friend's Dad used to be a minion tending to the needs of a mainframe in the south east of England many years back. Apparently it wasn't unheard of for an HP engineer to walk in through the door and announce that he'd come to replace a processor without the admin even being aware that a processor had died.

Same old (2, Informative)

KimmoKe (267803) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785500)

I could write those predictions. Actually most science and technology magazines have already printed similiar predictions for years now. If I type something BOLD like that also, will it get posted on Slashdot too?

In the year 2012 (4, Funny)

LordOfYourPants (145342) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785502)

In the year 2012:

Junis will upgrade to a 386

Jon Katz II begins writing articles for slashdot. His premiere article: What caused Columbine to happen II? A 37-part epic.

Stephen King and Alan Thicke will still be dying on a daily basis, missed by all.

The goatse.cx hole will increase in radius by 3m.

The (meta)-moderation system will still be broken.

E-paper will be coming out "real soon now"

The "How about a beowulf cluster of these?" joke finally gets played out.

Mozilla supports yenc decoding.

Not Quite (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785605)

Everything that could conceivably be part of a Beowulf cluster will be part of a Beowulf cluster!

Re:In the year 2012 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785629)

You forgot a couple:
Duke Nukem Forever will be released.
Gnu/Hurd will still be useless.

All of those things listed (1)

Soporific (595477) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785509)

Would be pretty cool if they were actually implemented. The RFID tags and GPS things seem to be the most promising. Inventory taking would be painless and hopefully lead to lower prices. Who knows though? Only time will tell. They just need to invent a car that can drive me home from the bar on autopilot and then I will be thoroughly happy.

~S

Nonono, he's got it all wrong! (3, Funny)

Freston Youseff (628628) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785513)

In the year two-thousand and twelve, we will have inexhaustable electricity sources, flying cars, commercial zeppelin transports, jetpacks, a non-crashable Microsoft Operating system and of course SPAM(TM) that is edible.

moving sidewalks (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785518)

They've always been promising us moving sidewalks. Why can't They keep their promises?

They are moving already (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785524)

The Earth is rotating as well as moving through space, right? So, I say moving sidewalks are already everywhere! A stationary sidewalk will be the real development.

Speech Recognition (4, Insightful)

Raul654 (453029) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785521)

I can see it happening to some extent - I mean, the algorithms used are really unreliable, but given time, I can see it becoming usable. However, I take issue with the way he think it will be presented. AI will not be advanced enough, IMHO. You won't say "How far to nearest gas station", you will probably be more limited in how you can ask your question. It might be close to "Car, distance to gas station, nearest" or some other limited syntax. I preface it with 'car' because you have to have some way to let the car know the question is directed at it.

Re:Speech Recognition (3, Funny)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785540)

No way, you'll say, "computer", not "car". You wouldn't be speaking to the car, but to a computer. Like in Star Trek, they call it 'computer,' and not 'ship.' ;)

Either that, or you'll give your car's computer a name and use that. "Chitty, give me directions to the nearest movie theatre."

Re:Speech Recognition (2)

LostCluster (625375) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785546)

That is one problem Star Trek never fully explained away... how the ship's computer knew it was being addressed rather than the character asking the question of another person in the room. Frequenly, the character would address it as "Computer", but far too often that command was skipped and it still worked.

Re:Speech Recognition (4, Funny)

digitalsushi (137809) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785569)

Nah, when they spoke to the computer, it was always much louder, and if they were alone in the room, always rhetorical.

Re:Speech Recognition (5, Interesting)

marcsiry (38594) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785584)

The characters, in the interest of drama, usually furrowed their brows, looked up at no one in particular, and assumed a deeper, "commanding" tone to their voice when addressing the computer.

Perhaps the computer uses a recognition algorithm based on all these factors to know when someon is talking to "it." My cat apparently has similar algorithms programmed in- I can speak in a conversational tone all day, even to a telephone, and the cat won't respond- but the moment I assume my "talking to kitty" voice, it snaps to attention.

Another interesting question about the ST computer- how did it route the person-to-person commnications before the individual spoke the receipient's name? You'd often here Picard's communicator pipe up: "Riker to Picard- you should come up to the bridge," or some such line.

One presumes that the communication did not go to everyone on the ship, only to be cut off when the word "Picard" was spoken. I always assumed the computer cached the outgoing communication until it was determined whom it was going to, and then retransmitted; the result should be a 1 second lag on the return to represent that, unless the computer subtly timeshifted the entire conversation to pad the lag into the spaces normally between words.

Re:Speech Recognition (2)

bmetz (523) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785640)

You are very wrong -- limited domain natural language technology exists right now in real deployed situations. The trick is narrowing the domain. Obviously, your car wouldn't be able to tell you what the meaning of life is or what kind of mutual fund you should diversify into. But questions like the one in the article -- sure, we can do this TODAY. Putting it into an embedded environment is just an exercise in moore's law.

I predict that... (1)

Mononoke (88668) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785525)

In the year 2012, beleaguered Apple Computer will be at death's door, ripe for purchase by Disney/Sony/etc.

( I just wanted to be the first to make this prediction for this particular year.)

RFID (2)

ciryon (218518) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785526)

One of the more probable and interesting technologies is Radio Frequency ID. Many people think it'll replace barcodes within some years, but I think many people (because of lack of knowledge) will be sceptic. We're hearing so much talk today allready of mobile phones and wireless networks being "dangerous" in different ways.

Ciryon

Other than speech recognition (4, Interesting)

redfiche (621966) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785528)

what on that list is impressive? He could've at least gone out on a small limb and mentioned fuel-cells.

Here's my predictions for 2012: (5, Funny)

tmark (230091) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785530)

(drumroll please)
5. computers will be much faster than they are today
4. computers will be much less expensive than they are now
3. programs will take much more space than they do now
2. hard drive capacities will be much larger than they are now
and finally... (drumroll please)
1. there will be even more duped articles on Slashdot

Re:Here's my predictions for 2012: (2)

digitalsushi (137809) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785554)

I doubt that in 2012 the average person will have that box in the corner of their living room that they call the computer. "The network will be the computer". :D I also doubt we will be using hard drives in the same sense as today. But that wont matter cause there's no typical computer to store it in anyways.

I wonder when the last remnants of slashdot will fade away... I could see it alive and kicking in 2012 to be honest with you. Not as it is, but at least in name and scope. I could see it being more elite and underground, too.

Re:Here's my predictions for 2012: (2)

zephc (225327) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785638)

In the corner of the living room? Mine's sitting on the floor between my legs, so I can father a gang of mutant super-children some day.

Re:Here's my predictions for 2012: (1)

daveirl (177821) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785601)

In the year 2012 computers will be 1000 times as powerful, 1000 times larger and owned by the 5 richest kings of Europe!

Paraphrasing Prof. Frink of course!

Hooray for RFID! (3, Insightful)

autopr0n (534291) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785531)

If nothing else, RFID could have spared Winona Ryder her recent and very embarrassing shoplifting arrest.

I'll say, just stick your in a conductive bag and they'll never know.

erhaps Frits Hollings will introduce the CRFIDTPA which will illegalize bags and pouches made from electrically conductive material.

show in the future (2)

digitalsushi (137809) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785532)

Anyone remember a PBS show that pretended to be a couple decades from now, reporting then current day events? I flipped in on the tail end of the show- one blurb had a couple who have never met, but got married in cyberspace, and she never wanted to meet him cause she was afraid that if she saw what he really looked like, she would be disgusted, and another blurb where a couple had a hacker controlling all of their appliances. I'm not asking if anyone else saw it so much as what were some of the other clips in that show?

Hopefully wrong.. (5, Funny)

WillRobinson (159226) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785539)

The car: You should not have to ask how far it is to the next gas station. The car knows how much gas you have, how many miles to the next station, and your gas millage, maybe even the terrain. It should be more like:
Hal: John, I have determined you should not have passed that last station, maybe you should turn around now.
Hal: John, you have two miles more before the point of no return to that gas station you passed.
Hal: John, are you listening to me?
John: Shut UP! You dont know i have a gas can in the trunk!
Hal: John, yes you do, but its empty! Remember last time?
John: Nag, Nag Nag..

my prediction...life will still suck (2)

havaloc (50551) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785550)

See subject. Life's still going to suck. The planet is still going to be overrun with idiots.

Re:my prediction...life will still suck (2)

digitalsushi (137809) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785599)

Life's gonna suck more, once people start getting addicted to virtual reality- a digital escape that will take some portion of people with addictive personalities, and mess their lifes up quite nicely. "Hey Bobby, you sure seem depressed- why don't you slip this helmet on each and every night for the rest of your life right after you get home from work? Heck... that job's just slowing you down come to think. These little babies are solar powered anyways. Hey, just don't forget to unplug and eat every 12 hours, ok there kiddo?"

A Few More Predictions (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785553)

Microsoft will release an OS without bugs, that "all your base are belong to us" joke will get old, and pigs will fly. Wait. Was that 2012? Oh, I thought it said 2102.

TV commercials (5, Insightful)

maunleon (172815) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785561)


Except for special events such as the Super Bowl and the Academy Awards, no one will watch TV shows at the time they are transmitted, and conventional 30-second commercials will be rare because advertisers won't pay when most viewers can hit the fast-forward button. Major broadcast networks and traditional prime-time programming will be fading, with most entertainment sold
through either a monthly subscription or a pay-per-view fee.


I would guess it is also possible for networks to start doing what they do during soccer games when they can't take breaks -- scroll the add on top of the programming. You could be watching Friends, with a little "Pampers" ad on the bottom. This would allow for even more commercial time, and they could sell the time to sync to various moments in a program. (e.g Rachel is playing with the baby, roll the Pampers ad. They are in the coffeehouse, roll the Starbucks ad)

Another thing that can happen is a'la sports programming. At various times during the program, the picture would shrink, making enough space for an ad to be displayed alongside. Some people will put up with this if it means free, and you can't skip the commercials.

See, aren't ya'll glad I'm not a network exec. :)

If it goes away, good riddance. They have to be careful with subscription fees.. commercial TV is mostly crap, so it is hard to price it correctly. All my local stations together would probably be worth about $7/mo to me if they were to be commercial free. Can they make money with that?

Re:TV commercials (1, Flamebait)

NoMoreNicksLeft (516230) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785616)

Haha. Not very bright, are you?

I have no trouble imagining it possible to hack my Tivo Series VI to automatically crop out crud like that, and stretch the picture back to normal.

And if they try to superimpose it on the video feed itself, it might even be possible to train a neural net to "rebuild" it with some degree of accuracy.

Technology is finally on our side for once, as opposed to the hordes of spam minions.

Re:TV commercials (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785632)

I hope pay tv never happens.

In Australia cable/pay tv is crap and has more adds than free to air. Free to air has all the best shows, movies and sports. And because of our anti syphoning laws, they can't take sports off free to air.

Not quite spot on (5, Insightful)

Subcarrier (262294) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785566)

The Internet is everywhere -- and nowhere.

This will take at least 15 years. People don't buy new washing machines all that often.

All present and accounted for -- always.

This will be in mobile phones within 5 years.

Walk now, pay later.

Probably unfeasible as described. More likely you will authorize payment for the item before putting it in the bag. The receiver at the entryway will only check that you don't leave with any unpaid items. 10 years is about right, I wager.

Prime time is your time

Not very adventurous there. 5 more years.

Finally, we can talk to our computers

People curse them every day, so this is already reality. ;-)

I doubt true voice control will be there in 10 years either, unless there is a major break through in AI technology. Before that, we will be limited to simple voice keyed activation.

RFID Shopping (1)

Atrahasis (556602) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785567)

I don't think this one is going to work for three reasons (maybe more, but these off the toip of my head at midnight):

Receiver fails to detect CC ID chip - customer gets hassled by security/alarms go off.

Receiver fails to detect goods/detects wrong number. Makes stock inventory no easier, overcharging and undercharging still a problem.

Cash sales. Some people don't have a CC a) because they can't get one (age limitations, credit problems) or b)because they don't want one.

The one thing wrong with predictions (1)

happyhippy (526970) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785572)

Is that they usually forget to take into account the human and business element.

A world where everything is online? Companies will exploit it getting you to opt out of buying things from them and people will view it as a invasion of privacy.

RFIDs on clothing? Wouldnt that make it easier for the people to steal stuff if the cashier element was eliminated? So cashiers will logically have to be turned into security guards in order to watch you. So stores become more intrusive in spying on you.

Watch how you go TV? Unless the TV networks and studios merge into one this wont happen. You wont be able to store films as Hollywood wont allow you to (unless you bought the 2012 version of the DVD/VHS/hologram). Its more likely the TV of the future wil store what the networks think youd like ie commerically rich dumbed down shit.

In a perfect world these would happen. In ours business and human habits affect it.

One Prediction Is Impossible (4, Informative)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785581)

Every cable and satellite television receiver will include a hard disk for recording shows, and those disks will have a minimum capacity of one terabyte, or 1,000 gigabytes, enough to store hundreds of hours of high-definition programming.

Not bloody likely. HD Video is likely to require about 15 GB/hour to store. 1 TB of data does NOT give you 'hundreds of hours', more like 65 hours.

Re:One Prediction Is Impossible (2, Interesting)

smithmc (451373) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785620)

Not bloody likely. HD Video is likely to require about 15 GB/hour to store. 1 TB of data does NOT give you 'hundreds of hours', more like 65 hours. ...using current video codecs, that is. But what about when we're using MPEG-20 or something?

Re:One Prediction Is Impossible (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785623)

15GB/hour? I don't think so.

Not with MPEG-4 or equivalent... (4, Insightful)

Goonie (8651) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785634)

They're talking about squeezing HD-DVD onto the same physical medium, but using MPEG-4 compression rather than the MPEG-2 currently used. Now, assuming that a DVD can hold 9 gigabytes and a necessary minimum capacity of two hours, that's about 4.5 gigabytes per hour. That gives about 220 hours of storage.

IMHO (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785582)

I predict that in the year 2012 i will finally have a date! YES! Girl Geeks. mmmm

Do we really want these things? (2)

teamhasnoi (554944) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785585)

Every device on the net? Privacy, saftey, cost, and what the hell? Why do I need a toaster connected to the net? I just want to make some frickin' toast. If something is smart enough to be net connected, it is smart enough to be hacked. Ordinary devices could be the new invasion of privacy. And damnit! Toasters are going to be cheaper without tech, than with.

My presence is for me to decide. I don't want anyone to know right where I am unless I tell them or they are with me. The first anyone who insists on knowing my wherebouts 24/7 (who's not my wife ;) will learn a lesson in the wherebouts of my fist.

Smart tags wont be on price tags, they'll be built in to products. Again, I don't want little tattletales broadcasting every thing I have to anyone with a hig gain scanner. Theives will move from the store to your home. Expect that they will be illegal to remove by anyone, too.

TV will move to a pay per show model. Product placement will be rampant, as well as the commercials (you'll get those for free, of course. ) Expect shows to be shorter, and drawn out over longer periods. Reality Based shows will most likely thrive, since many of the things they will do on TV won't be allowed in RL. Invasiveness is the key.

Talking to my computer will still be hampered by bloated code, legislation, monopolies, and chewing with my mouth full.

All this will be driven by companies who want you to consume more and more. Durabillity will be replaced by a throwaway society - recycling will most likely be increased, since raw materials will become scarcer, and the number of people will continue to balloon.

See you there!

They always overlook... (1)

SYFer (617415) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785586)

...it won't seem to odd to say, ``Car, how far to the next gas station?'' and for the car to reply ``Eight miles ahead at exit 37, there is a Chevron and a Union 76.'' ...the commercial aspect and assume we'll all enjoy these benefits for free. More likely: "Eight miles ahead at exit 37, there is a Quick-Stop Cheveron with Food-O-Rama and Travellers' Information Center. To hear about... 1... other option, please say "additional options please" while pressing the "options" key on your dash."

Training for 2012 (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785588)

Perhaps by 2012 I will be able to stretch my rectum as wide as mr. goatse. It would be nice to see my picture beside his on the same site. Perhaps then we could make some goatse mugs, mousepads, and t-shirts. I am also curious to know if anyone has a site with a woman that has such rectal stretching ability. Please provide some links if you know of any.

My Prediction: (1)

Tiro (19535) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785590)

We will be bombarded nonstop by invasive ads like the stupid SBC Pacific banner video that I saw when I viewed the link.

I had been browsing in Mozilla a long time and I didn't remember just how bad ads can be when using IE . . .

Something old, something new... (2)

InnovATIONS (588225) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785591)

Most of these predictins are fairly safe. One of the most interesting is the self-checkout store. It might be hard to get the tags tamper proof. Remember that they would not merely have to get them tamper proof in terms of being to sneakily remove them, but tamper proof in the sense of preventing them from transmitting or tamperproof in the sense of having the recievers not get the signals, such as good old fashioned jamming. Some real challenges, but not out of the question entirely. The preciction that your family, etc will allways know where you are may well prove to be possible but unwanted (as may be the prediction about having your washing machine tell the company how often you are washing clothes). This is just an extension of the electronic name tags in the 1992 article. People want some privacy. It is a bit like universal picture phones. The first picture phone was demonstrated in a demonstration between AT&T headquarters and the Secretary of the Treasury in Washington. The Secretary of the Treasury was Herbert Hoover (yes, that Herbert Hoover, the technology is really that old).

My Predictions (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785603)

I predict people will have had enough of getting a bill every month listing millions of micro-payments for all these invisible services. Paper will still be paper, the internet will still be two dimensional, and nobody will use email anymore because instant messaging is less spammy when you simply block all incomings not on your address list. Wood panels will become popular on cars again, and on computers too. A large desktop PC will be the size of a coke-can and generate enough waste heat to cook your evening meal.

Distributed.net will have finished another couple of pointless projects. Seti will still being going strong and getting nothing back in return. Cancer will be cured by computers, and aids will still be spreading wildly in poor countries while patented drugs keep rich people alive indefinitely who have the same disease.

Every major city in the world will still have terrible traffic problems. Computers will model perfect cities and nobody will build them. Nuclear weapons will still be able to wipe out humanity, and at least one small country will become a small scorch-mark as a result (and this will have been predicted 2 hours ahead by a computer model).

Armadillo Aerospace will have the first 'flying car' but it won't be available for public use because it's too dangerous.

The International Space Station will be almost finished and still not particularly useful (as far as anyone can tell). People will not have ventured to the moon or mars. Nor will they have plans to. (or budgets maybe).

And I will still be reading Slashdot.

About the talking car (1)

happyhippy (526970) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785604)

A UK show called Drive or something had in it a couple of weeks ago a car with a verbal command phone. You say the persons name and it calls him/her. Thing was you had to set it up with the names first and the voice recognition was terrible. It took two hours for the presenter (Jeremy Clarkson) to vocally input and store a phone number and its owner.

Not many electric objects will be connected. (1)

deragon (112986) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785606)

Honestly, when people make predictions, why they forget the cost impact?

I would not want my wash machine cost an extra $30 for electronics so it can warn a repair service which will charge me $70 to fix a problem where my water is slightly more warmer than it should and cost me only $3 more per year of electricity. And if my wash machine has a serious defect, I will find out the old way by hearing or seeing what is going wrong; no need of a computer for that.

And if you want to connect appliances to the Internet, either you use the electric grid for data transmission (if available) and you must pay for it, or you connect the appliances to your ethernet network (assume you have ADSL internet). How many of you have houses with ethernet near the wash machine? How many will drill holes through your walls to get ethernet to your wash machine?

The suggestion is feasable technically, but not practical. It won't be widly deployed. Same thing with GPS. I do not want to pay more for a GPS in my car; I do not get lost that often.

I do not want my appliances to be intelligent because the more complex they are, the more the chances of failure and the more they cost at purchase and for maintenance. I like my wash machine as it is, as my refrigerator.

Having electrical appliances connected to the internet are certainly not killer apps, and that is why they will fail on the market (unless these appliances provide actual browsing capabilities on the internet, like on a refrigerator or a microwave; some people might actually want this).

SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT FLYING CARS ALREADY (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785610)

This has been a public service announcement brought to you by Mr. Wanky.

This is awful (1)

realmolo (574068) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785612)

Is anyone else even just a LITTLE disturbed that most of these predictions require 24/7 surveillance (one way or another) of any person that wants to take advantage of them? I'm sorry, but barring some new totalitarian regime taking over the U.S. (which could slowly happen, like a frog boiling in a pot), NO ONE in their right mind is going to want all this stuff.

Look back on 1992... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785614)

When looking a the future, it can be a good idea to look at the past predictions of the future. Here [bayarea.com]is a link to that. And you know, so much has changed since 1992. We were going through hard economic times, the president was a guy named "Bush" and the U.S. was in a conflict with Iraq. My, how times have changed. :)

Re:Look back on 1992... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785637)

So, in 2012, the President will be Clinton (Hillary), in the midst of a scandal over having sex with an intern in the Oval Office. Meanwhile, a giant economic bubble will be forming, with venture capital for all! Sounds fun!

The truly good thing (1)

kliment (627259) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785615)

Would be a way to replicate matter, and a source of huge amounts of energy to power it. That would give material things the same status as movies and music on P2P networks today. If you could borrow your neighbor's car, computer, etc, and replicate it exactly. Truly this would change the way corporate entities work. I wonder what form copy protection would take? Tactical nuclear explosion on copy attempt?

If hardware takes the same status among college students as software, one can imagine all sorts of interesting stuff. And of course, making a render farm would be much easier.
Would there actually be any incentive for software/hardware development? However, this would mean that money would be meaningless, so any work people do would be of pure interest or wish to develop creatively. Creativity would actually be the only task left to humankind.

At this point, another scenario would be the installation into each human of a happybutton, that gives an instant orgasm. Humanity would then be kept in a state of constant ecstasy, never being creative like before. Maybe this is the end of the world in 2012 that people are talking about in other comments. Would you trade your current lives for eternal bliss?

I don't know about these predictions... (5, Insightful)

7-Vodka (195504) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785618)

1. Every appliance is connected to the internet.

That would mean that internet connectivity has to be wireless and cheap. It would also require people to WANT their appliances connected to the internet. I'm sorry but my washing machine works really well right now on it's own without it bugging me to take it in or yelling adds at me. If that's why these machines want to connect (to rip me off, advertise to me, tell me i should take it into the dealer and pay more money) then I'm gonna be ready with a nice jamming signal for them.

2. The IM prediction and online presence.

Maybe it will be like somewhat as he says. But I sure as hell am not going to have a damn gps signal telling everyone who wants to talk to me exactly where I am. And I'm not gonna be available all the time either. My settings are gonna default to "leave me a god damn email msg and I'll get back to you when I can". Not 'here's my exact location, what I'm doing and 5 ways to page me right now'. :)

3. Walking out of shops and the rfid tag nonsense.

Riiight. A store with no clerks. Talk about easy to shoplift if you have your own programmable rfids. or just walk out next to someone else and charge your stuff to their card.

4. Tivo in every home, no restrictions.

Let's see if the mpaa + networks will just roll over for that one. My guess is it will be a crippled tivo ripoff with all sorts of DRM and palladium inside if that happens. Anything else will be illegal.

5. Speech recognition.

Don't know about this one. Everyone and their mother has thought this was right around the corner for the past 20 years.

Here's my prediction:
Corporate America will finally dispense with the play acting and be in direct control of the country. Instead of having senators from each constituency, we will have senator Disney, senator Microsoft, senator Tobacco industry, senator chemical industry. And the president will be the CEO of the country.

ObFriends (the TV show) (2)

still_sick (585332) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785625)

"And in a few years you'll be able to talk to your computer. You can say like 'Wash my car', or 'Clean my room'. ... Of course it won't be able to do any of those things, but it'll understand what you said."

Speech Recognition (1)

crea5e (590098) | more than 11 years ago | (#4785627)

Speech recognition prediction is like the "first post posts". Computers may get complex enough to understand speech. But you know I bet then they decide not to listen cause they think we are just a sad sack of genes, "All they do is complain and read slashdot. Life is tough as a server." Don't want them to be like humans, they may just become human and that'd be a problem.

2012 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785630)

5. Phasers

4. Force Fields

3. Transporters

2. Replicators

1. Warp Drive

its gonna suck to be stupid 10 years from now (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4785631)

just think how hard this world will be for the dumb people. with any luck all this new technology will make it so they cant feed them selvs anymore and they will just die off quickly. but at least we will have cool stuff at lower prices.

but seriously, we need to start educating the masses because they will be the ones who make bad products and ideas become mainstream.
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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...