4 ms·

I don’t know man, the human race makes great technological leaps, or rather leaps in understanding that allow new technology. And nobody can really predict that

I don’t know man, the human race makes great technological leaps, or rather leaps in understanding that allow new technology. And nobody can really predict that. It’s almost like your Einsteins, Newtons, Boltzmanns, Maxwells Paulis and Plancks had some kind 2-way channel with divinity. Even though we all stand on the shoulders of giants, sometimes a new giant appears out of the ether. And there’s no doubt we’re done. I saw a 60minutes where an air force pilot dead ass states that they saw a tic-tac lookin ufo churn water in the Pacific Ocean before basically teleporting away, only to be relocated 60 miles later. There’s more for us to know, even if that air force crew (there were more than 1 witnesses) were all just tripping on peyote.

bmitc 5y ago
How does new technology help these things exactly? Isn't technology, along with the discovery of coal and oil, a major contributor to the scaling of the human population and the effects of that? The vast industrialization over the past 150 has not been good for humanity or the planet.
- cjohnson318 5y ago
  I think they generally mean: optimal and sustainable farming, abundant clean energy, and world leaders that can think more than two years ahead.
  - bmitc 5y ago
    They specifically mentioned technological leaps, so that's what I went on, for better or worse. I think clean energy will not by itself solve much. We need to reduce and reorganize at the same time as bringing on clean energy production, but that won't happen. Look at China, who is the world leader in clean energy production. I worry if fusion ever happens, people will just be like "great, electrical energy is free now", which won't be good. I agree we need leaders thinking more than a few years ahead.
  - jhoechtl 5y ago
    > and world leaders that can think more than two years ahead They can do that. It's the electoral system which doesn't give an incentive to do so.
cjohnson318 5y ago
I don't know either. We made giant steps in the 20th C, but I feel like we're seeing diminishing returns now. From 1950 to 1970 cars advanced a lot, but from 2000 to 2020, they're still largely the same. (Sure, there's Teslas with highway autonomy, and some systems can handle an on-ramp, but "Mexico City" autonomy seems really far off.) Unless someone breaks Moore's Law, figures out general quantum computing or general AI, I think the next 30 years are going to look a lot like the last 10, but with more hurricanes and global migration.
- choeger 5y ago
  I think everyone has said this in every decade of the last century.
  - vmladenov 5y ago
    It’s also not true. Cars are currently undergoing the single largest revolution since they were invented: electrification. Designs that people have been optimizing over a century are suddenly obviated and new challenges are taking their place.
    - ericmay 5y ago
      True but the usage of cars themselves is the main problem. Electrification of cars helps, certainly, but we should be walking and biking, not driving. They’re more efficient, but we are still just using expensive energy to power them when we could just build better and not need them. Calories are cheaper than watts.
- spiralx 5y ago
  There are massive advances in subjects like materials and biotechnology happening now, they're just not big and flashy despite being at least as game-changing as any other major advance over the last century.
Xplune13 5y ago
That is true, but basing a prediction model on the assumption that "technology will fix things, and someone will save us" is bad in my opinion.
- choeger 5y ago
  Huh? Solar power generation at scale is exactly such a thing. Wind power, too. Also hydroponics are a thing at the industrial scale now as is desalination of seawater. These are not magic bullets but they do fix a lot of things.
  - Xplune13 5y ago
    because we know how solar, wind works and that is "reality". Basing a model on some imaginary future technology that we don't know is possible or not shouldn't happen in my opinion. It is one thing to think or create different models with possible future technologies taken into it and other to be certain about that happening based on that imaginary technology.

bmitc 5y ago

How does new technology help these things exactly? Isn't technology, along with the discovery of coal and oil, a major contributor to the scaling of the human population and the effects of that? The vast industrialization over the past 150 has not been good for humanity or the planet.

cjohnson318 5y ago
I think they generally mean: optimal and sustainable farming, abundant clean energy, and world leaders that can think more than two years ahead.
- bmitc 5y ago
  They specifically mentioned technological leaps, so that's what I went on, for better or worse. I think clean energy will not by itself solve much. We need to reduce and reorganize at the same time as bringing on clean energy production, but that won't happen. Look at China, who is the world leader in clean energy production. I worry if fusion ever happens, people will just be like "great, electrical energy is free now", which won't be good. I agree we need leaders thinking more than a few years ahead.
- jhoechtl 5y ago
  > and world leaders that can think more than two years ahead They can do that. It's the electoral system which doesn't give an incentive to do so.

cjohnson318 5y ago

I don't know either. We made giant steps in the 20th C, but I feel like we're seeing diminishing returns now. From 1950 to 1970 cars advanced a lot, but from 2000 to 2020, they're still largely the same. (Sure, there's Teslas with highway autonomy, and some systems can handle an on-ramp, but "Mexico City" autonomy seems really far off.) Unless someone breaks Moore's Law, figures out general quantum computing or general AI, I think the next 30 years are going to look a lot like the last 10, but with more hurricanes and global migration.

choeger 5y ago
I think everyone has said this in every decade of the last century.
- vmladenov 5y ago
  It’s also not true. Cars are currently undergoing the single largest revolution since they were invented: electrification. Designs that people have been optimizing over a century are suddenly obviated and new challenges are taking their place.
  - ericmay 5y ago
    True but the usage of cars themselves is the main problem. Electrification of cars helps, certainly, but we should be walking and biking, not driving. They’re more efficient, but we are still just using expensive energy to power them when we could just build better and not need them. Calories are cheaper than watts.
spiralx 5y ago
There are massive advances in subjects like materials and biotechnology happening now, they're just not big and flashy despite being at least as game-changing as any other major advance over the last century.

Xplune13 5y ago

That is true, but basing a prediction model on the assumption that "technology will fix things, and someone will save us" is bad in my opinion.

choeger 5y ago
Huh? Solar power generation at scale is exactly such a thing. Wind power, too. Also hydroponics are a thing at the industrial scale now as is desalination of seawater. These are not magic bullets but they do fix a lot of things.
- Xplune13 5y ago
  because we know how solar, wind works and that is "reality". Basing a model on some imaginary future technology that we don't know is possible or not shouldn't happen in my opinion. It is one thing to think or create different models with possible future technologies taken into it and other to be certain about that happening based on that imaginary technology.