[ExI] Is future progress moving to virtual reality?

[BillK]

On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 5:23 AM, PJ Manney wrote:
> Please don't extrapolate grand historical trends from BS.  The Walt
> Disney Company doesn't change Tomorrowland because Disney's leaders
> since Walt's death don't care about the future.  They can't see beyond
> the next dividend payment schedule or stock price expectation.  They'd
> rather do what their marketing departments say costs the least to
> accomplish to change the rides just enough to both maintain safety and
> create the slightest bit of novelty to encourage revisits.  This is
> about a lack of vision and cheapness.  Not future trends.  Future
> trends (and correcting them when they don't turn out quite as
> expected) costs too much money.
>
>

Agreed that Disney are trying to create what sells and appeals to the public.

Surely that is an indicator of the direction that public interest is moving in?
The general public like the retro 1950s science fiction view of the future.

Whereas in the real world, man in space has disappeared since the moon
shots. Transport is still cars, with some tuning of the power systems.
Kitchen equipment hasn't changed in fifty years.
I think the point is that shuffling bits in a computer is far easier
than developing new space technology.

I think there has been a generational change. Today the general public
care more about getting a job, paying medical bills, getting a
pension, just day to day surviving. The vision of future splendour
seems to be receding further every day, so people retreat into
nostalgia and entertainment in virtual reality.

I don't think it is comfort that is driving this. I think it is a
feeling that the world is out of control, has gone crazy and people
just want it to stop. (But maybe that's just me!)  :)


BillK