Comment Predictions (Score 1) 407
The Katz predictions are interresting, but they seem superficial to a certain degree. Additional thought needs to be made to how the predictions will impact society and affect the future predictions. That is one of the great skills of Arthur C. Clarke, he develops a very coherent image of how the prediction will impact our world culture. I don't always agree with them, but he makes good arguments.
First, the "Techno-wars". This is simply not a realistic forcast. With technology prices constantly falling, these devices become more and more easilly obtainable to all levels of society. Any conflicts of this sort would, in most cases, be limited to those with a phobia re: technology. These groups would have a tendancy to seal themselves off from most of society (as technology is spreading to all areas, they need to seal themselves off to avoid it). As a result, any potential "Techno-Wars" would be very localized and contained to small areas. Education is the best deterent to such a future. Another, more likely conflict is a type which has repeatedly scarred human history; conflicts resulting from financial status. While there are more people today who are able to afford their own homes, the divide in incomes between those who can and cannot has been widening. It's a gulf which can create feelings of rebelion, and it could, potentially, create large scale riots more significant than the conflicts resulting from technology acceptance.
While AI can conceivably develop (or "evolve") to a point where machines exceed humans in their ability to think and create. If this comes to pass, each next generation of machines could only possibly be built by the machine generation before it, leaving humans out of the loop. While I see this likely, I also wouldn't expect it until 2100, if then - remember, we need to grant them the right to self-evolve and self-rule first. It's naive to think that humans will willingly grant machines equal human rights (varying by country). Humans will resist this. Also, the suggestion that machines will all be benevolent is eaqually naive. If humans maintain access to the machine "minds", they also have the ability to modify those minds. It is, sadly, human nature to have someone eventually decide to modify those electronic minds to attack his/her enemies. The other side would do likewise, and machine/robot warfare results. Not a promising future, but militaries won't be able to resist the idea of armies of "replacable" robots, no matter how smart they are.
"Fusion Power" - or more acurately Cold Fusion, has long been a dream for affordable energy sources. Create an easy to afford energy source with no dangerous by-products, and the world economy would experience a massive cultural shift. The only downside is that groups controlling existing energy sources will want to hold back any new energy sources. How this will manifest itself is up for debate. At the very least, expect corporate espianage and sabotage of the new technology. If the secret to creating and controlling a cold fusion reaction can be discovered, it will become the dominant energy source. But due to the above, not until 20 or more years after its discovery.
"Sensory Input". Inevitable. This will eventually come to pass; but like much of technology, we will make many partial steps in the race to achieve the full benefits that can be dreamt. A "swap-out" memory is unlikely, but accelerated learning - and more importantly - learning dangerous tasks with relative safety will come to pass. Not to mention the effect it'll have on communication (now this is instant messaging!), entertainment (try playing quake with ALL your sences!), terrorism (expect terrorist groups to try sabotaging or taking over the controls for the sensory input), military (a robot wired to a human gives all the advantages of a live soldier, with the replacability of a robot soldier), not to mention manufacturing, search-and-rescue, exploration, and government.
Just a few of my opinions on the potentials in the future.
First, the "Techno-wars". This is simply not a realistic forcast. With technology prices constantly falling, these devices become more and more easilly obtainable to all levels of society. Any conflicts of this sort would, in most cases, be limited to those with a phobia re: technology. These groups would have a tendancy to seal themselves off from most of society (as technology is spreading to all areas, they need to seal themselves off to avoid it). As a result, any potential "Techno-Wars" would be very localized and contained to small areas. Education is the best deterent to such a future. Another, more likely conflict is a type which has repeatedly scarred human history; conflicts resulting from financial status. While there are more people today who are able to afford their own homes, the divide in incomes between those who can and cannot has been widening. It's a gulf which can create feelings of rebelion, and it could, potentially, create large scale riots more significant than the conflicts resulting from technology acceptance.
While AI can conceivably develop (or "evolve") to a point where machines exceed humans in their ability to think and create. If this comes to pass, each next generation of machines could only possibly be built by the machine generation before it, leaving humans out of the loop. While I see this likely, I also wouldn't expect it until 2100, if then - remember, we need to grant them the right to self-evolve and self-rule first. It's naive to think that humans will willingly grant machines equal human rights (varying by country). Humans will resist this. Also, the suggestion that machines will all be benevolent is eaqually naive. If humans maintain access to the machine "minds", they also have the ability to modify those minds. It is, sadly, human nature to have someone eventually decide to modify those electronic minds to attack his/her enemies. The other side would do likewise, and machine/robot warfare results. Not a promising future, but militaries won't be able to resist the idea of armies of "replacable" robots, no matter how smart they are.
"Fusion Power" - or more acurately Cold Fusion, has long been a dream for affordable energy sources. Create an easy to afford energy source with no dangerous by-products, and the world economy would experience a massive cultural shift. The only downside is that groups controlling existing energy sources will want to hold back any new energy sources. How this will manifest itself is up for debate. At the very least, expect corporate espianage and sabotage of the new technology. If the secret to creating and controlling a cold fusion reaction can be discovered, it will become the dominant energy source. But due to the above, not until 20 or more years after its discovery.
"Sensory Input". Inevitable. This will eventually come to pass; but like much of technology, we will make many partial steps in the race to achieve the full benefits that can be dreamt. A "swap-out" memory is unlikely, but accelerated learning - and more importantly - learning dangerous tasks with relative safety will come to pass. Not to mention the effect it'll have on communication (now this is instant messaging!), entertainment (try playing quake with ALL your sences!), terrorism (expect terrorist groups to try sabotaging or taking over the controls for the sensory input), military (a robot wired to a human gives all the advantages of a live soldier, with the replacability of a robot soldier), not to mention manufacturing, search-and-rescue, exploration, and government.
Just a few of my opinions on the potentials in the future.
