I too thought the article's arguments were pretty weak. Brave New World and 1984 are good counterexamples to disprove the article's main point. I would also enj

I too thought the article's arguments were pretty weak. Brave New World and 1984 are good counterexamples to disprove the article's main point. I would also enjoy seeing a point-by-point analysis of what was predicted and what happened (had the article not missed forest for the trees). The article also argues many things are the same (like drinking water). Well, I know how much life has changed in the last 40 years. These concepts were unknown by the public or not-yet-popular a short 20-25 years ago: internet, smart phone, social media, wearables, electric cars, autopilot, laptops, machine learning, online learning & working... We're going through exponential change, and the author still argues not much has changed in the last 100 years. We're still drinking water etc :) Laughable. If you think think change is only at the top (of economic ladder), see also "The Better Angels of Our Nature" or "It's Getting Better All the Time: 100 Greatest Trends of the Last 100 years".