3 ms·

> Maybe flying cars just don’t make sense? I think it's just a placeholder metaphor to represent <hypothetical futuristic "thing" that increases our quality of

• bee_rider 6y ago
  But also, the fact that it was impractical is itself a metaphor -- it turns out many of the things they thought would be cool and futuristic were actually impractical when you get to the details.
  • bhupy 6y ago
    Sure, but that's besides the point. It's sort of like that meme about "The World If <my pet policy was implemented>" (example: https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/394/070/7f2.jpg https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/394/070/7f2...). It features over the top flying cars and infrastructure because it's trying to make a point. When one says "we could have had flying cars, but instead we got X", that's the underlying concept. Whether or not the flying car is "practical" is kind of besides the point. Either that, or we need to find some other generally agreed upon term to represent an actually practical but futuristic invention that represents human progress (or the lack thereof).
    • imtringued 6y ago
      >"The World If <my pet policy was implemented>">"The World If <my pet policy was implemented>" http://eduard-heindl.de/energy-storage/energy-storage-system.html http://eduard-heindl.de/energy-storage/energy-storage-system... Well, we would get cheap energy storage and cheap energy. No promises of a superior future, just a cheaper future.
    • deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    • bee_rider 6y ago
      I suggest "we could have had an all-nuclear grid."