[ExI] I think people tend to confuse 2050 with 2100!

samantha sjatkins at mac.com
Tue Jun 8 11:13:07 UTC 2010

John Grigg wrote:
> I googled the phrase "life in the year 2050" and found these rathering
> amusing links about the subject.  I think people tend to be
> over-optimistic when prognosticating about the future.  I run into
> predictions that may be reality by 2100, but probably not in 2050.
> http://2050-dafthermit.blogspot.com/2009/05/2050.html
> http://zone000.wordpress.com/2008/03/09/life-in-the-year-2050/
> http://sg.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20061202060931AAMCqp6
> I liked the "pop out your brain when you go to the airport" idea.  ; )
Middle one was much too tame.  The first one is likely to be all 
attempted by then whether we succeed or not.  The last one seemed to 
tame until the ridiculous settling venus.  Clearly terraforming a place 
that screwed up for our body plans would take longer.  Unless we are 
robots or deeply altered by then.  Besides, what is down that gravity 
well that you can't get easier in space?   You won't see all religions 

We are talking about 40 years from now.  How much happened in the last 
40 years?  How much faster do things happen now?  My only uncertainty is 
the various ways we can majorly screw up our high tech civilization.  
Assuming we don't have too major meltdowns I fully expect to see:

- more than one year added to average lifespan per year;
- medical nanotech capable of repairing most damage;
- > human artificial intelligence
- molecular nanotechnology (assemblers)
- embedded internet connectivity
- virtual reality and virtual worlds as good as surrogates
- seriously augmented reality
- serious space exploitation all the way out asteroid belt

I don't think we get 90 years to fart around on getting some of these 
things.  We will need them too badly long before then.

- samantha

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list