5 ms·

Nice snappy comment but what exactly do you mean? Do you think this sort of thing is impossible? Or that 2029 is way too early? Or are you just saying that spec

• aswanson 19y ago
  He is saying that the article says nothing new and it's more or less pseudo-journalism. I tend to agree, having read the book he wrote on this same topic 9 years ago.
  • dejb 19y ago
    I don't think that was what he was saying. I agree that the article contains nothing new.
• gruseom 19y ago
  I don't know what's impossible. I'm saying this stuff is made up. Nobody really knows anything about it, and there's no way to prove or disprove it (except by waiting a long time). I think it gets attention not because of anything to do with the future, but because it triggers emotions in the present. Some people find it exciting and want it to be true, others find it frightening and want it to be false, and so on. That leads to controversy, but the controversy isn't really about anything, other than conflicting emotions finding arguments to clothe themselves in.
  • dejb 19y ago
    Well you could to some extent make the same argument over any attempts to predict the future. Global warming is an instance that comes to mind. The point of it all is that your assessment of the likely futures can effect your current actions. This sort of stuff can be particularly useful for tech startups. But to follow your style of argument - it can also be true that some people would prefer not to think of a future that is radically different from the past and present. So they will often reflexively turn away from that sort of discussion, dismissing it as pointless. This is the sort of attitude a lot of people displayed to the internet during its growth. I personally think there is maybe a 20% change he is close to right which to me makes it hugely significant and deserving of a lot more attention than it gets.