What Will Life Be Like in the Year 2008? (Nov, 1968)

[pg]

Basically, we got the things that depend on electronics (web, cell phones) and not the ones that depend on other technology (flying cars, domed cities, artificial organs).

I notice there's another way to partition that set: we got the things that don't require too much government involvement.

We got the cheap meat-like food, but from an innovation less benevolent than algae farms: factory-farmed meat.

Come to think of it, there turned out to be a similar workaround for the domed city problem: everyone just moved where the weather was good.

What's weirdest about this for me is that 1968 was the year we came to America. I remember 1968. It's kind of crazy to think there were a lot of people walking around then thinking we'd be travelling around in flying cars.

[maxwell]

The bottleneck seems to be energy. Electronics don't really require that much power compared to transportation and living space, and have been able to make "futuristic" advancements even with our reliance on primitive power sources (i.e. fossil fuels).

Not that this has necessarily been a bad thing; perhaps better for human evolution to have the free worldwide communication system that boosts our intelligence before we get boundless energy potential.

As far as medical advancements go, well, it's hard to hack yourself. I'll expect the flying cars well before the intelligence pills.

[dfranke]

I'm still holding out hope for autonomous cars within a decade. Technology-wise we're pretty much there. The hard part will be convincing the public and government regulators to accept them.

[greendestiny]

I think rather than government involvement, things that are largely physical are bound by stronger constraints. Also when it comes to things like intracity transportation we tend to underestimate old solutions like walking and riding.

[michaelneale]

His description of credit cards and electronic "money" was spot on too. Once again - was mostly a technical problem.

[martythemaniak]

Sure it's funny, but just wait until the people of 2045 dig up Ray Kurzweil's "Singularity is Near". Fourty years ago some people thought we'd have automated cars, undersea resorts and climatized, domed cities. Today some people think 40 years from now we'll be immortal, omniscient, omnipotent gods that rule the universe...

[phaedrus]

One of my CS professors is heavy into Kurzweil. He had me read "The Singularity is Near". I decided Kurzweil's arguments are the rhetorical equivalent of those algebra jokes where you "prove" 1=2 but it goes through a step that hides a divide by zero. Similarly, "The Singularity is Near" uses steps that seem logical to come to a ridiculous conclusion.

[lg]

I think the four-hour workday is an interesting idea. I'm still in school but I worked at a real estate development office for a summer, and most of those jobs could've been done in four hours a day if people didn't get away with being so lazy. I bet a lot of companies could reduce the workday to four hours, and if they're quicker to fire people for not making deadlines and such, they'd get exactly the same productivity out of them as they do now (plus, lots of people would probably want to work there).

[ardit33]

If we all had a 4hr job day, then people will be getting 2 jobs. In a consumer markets, where how much you pay for housing determines the schooling of your kids, or the "want" for plasma tvs, nicer cars, more shiny things will make people work as much as they can.

The only way to enforce a 4 hrs work day will be thru law (goverment mandate not to work more than 4hrs a day, ala EU's 37.5 normal workweek),

Or, if something like that star trek machine that can create everything (you press a button, and food just comes out from it, or any electronics/material need you need). Then people will be working only to teach, design new things, entertain, as material needs will be superflous.

[dkokelley]

The unfortunate thing about a 4 hour work day for traditional (read: non-technical) workers is that the advancement of technological tools allows them to accomplish the same amount of work in less time, meaning that if an individual (or entire company) wanted to get ahead, they would still use the entire 8 hours (arbitrary number. Many use even more) to accomplish much more work.

Technology hasn't shortened the amount of work we do, it has raised the standard for everyone to accomplish more.

This is mostly meant to apply to non-technical workers. People who deal with technology have a different and unique set of standards.

[xirium]

The OA5 business process ( http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=140712 ) is a more moderate and conventional version of this idea.

[danw]

It's interesting to see that the 4-hour workweek was proposed as early as 1932: http://www.zpub.com/notes/idle.html

[edw519]

Hey, we still have 8 months to go. Maybe it'll all be true by then.

[icky]

They were obviously predicting the state of the art at the end of President Gore's 2008. ;-)

[parker]

"TV-telephone shopping is common. To shop, you simply press the numbered code of a giant shopping center. You press another combination to zero in on the department and the merchandise in which you are interested."

--> I find it fascinating that they just couldn't conceive of a massive network of computers to do things like this... some things are so out to lunch still, but things like direct deposit of funds into your bank account, I can't believe that was so far fetched?

[wallflower]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minitel

[socratees]

People overestimate things on a shorter term, and underestimate on a longer term.

[michaelneale]

That quote (or variation) if often attributed to Bill Gates? is it? or is it older wisdom of some sort.

[johnyzee]

Hell yes. That article reads like what I think my product will do in four years...

[gaborcselle]

Makes me think that the things that are most likely to change are those where entrepreneurs can most easily create products without needing to get around government rules and regulations.

[tim2]

"The single most important item in 2008 households is the computer."

A true visionary.

[aflag]

Some people are so close to that futuristic 2008, yet most people in the world are so far away. We really should figure out a way to fix all that.

[icky]

The Harrison Bergeron school of equality? ;-)

[rglullis]

Why?

[bayareaguy]

Large areas of the sea being are indeed beds of "protein-rich" algae - fed by nitrogen in industrial and agricultural waste.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/oceans/la-me-ocean30jul30,...

[petercooper]

Most predictions of the future tend to be exaggerated, because that's what people like to read and dream about. That does mean, however, that most of today's predictions about the future can also be taken with a pinch of salt, which is a little depressing.

[dougm]

"Heart disease has virtually been eliminated by drugs and diet."

Not really much excuse for the diet part of this one going so far wrong is there.

[johnyzee]

Sort of depressing - basically everything that rings true was possible in '68. Hell, even the internet was almost ready in '68.

[icky]

I love their faith in the National Centralized Single-Point-of-Failure Traffic Computer. ;)

[phaedrus]

I found it ironic that they pegged the population for today (around 350 million), amongst all the other things they got wrong, and then went on to say that only domed cities could support such a large population!

[xirium]

Colonisation of the ocean was considered enevitable in that era. It is also covered in the 1970 book Future Shock by Alvin Toffler. However, so far, it has been easier to improve utilisation of land.

[noonespecial]

Ha! I saw "one click" shopping in there. Eat your heart out amazon.

[TrevorJ]

I'm frikking depressed now.