6 ms·

This is surprisingly accurate, reserved and balanced through the lens of society as well as science. I was expecting something more fanciful like flying horses

by tomxor 5y ago

This is surprisingly accurate, reserved and balanced through the lens of society as well as science. I was expecting something more fanciful like flying horses or whatnot.

Brendinooo 5y ago
Yeah, I think he had a good understanding of the implications of the newer technology of his day. You don't know what you don't know so there's nothing about computers here, but most of this article was really well done.
apozem 5y ago
These are better than 99% of predictions because the author has a good eye for what will change (technology, transportation, consumer goods) and what won’t (human nature).
Aperocky 5y ago
Except that: > I'm sure that technological advancement in 2022 will be amazing, but they will be nothing as amazing as the present day than it is over 100 years ago (i.e. 1822). I don't know about that statement.
- another_story 5y ago
  Cars, trains, airplanes, electricity used in consumer devices, movies, telephones, radio, instantaneous intercontinental communication, etc... We have some cool stuff compared to 1922, but you could argue the shift was greater.
  - feintruled 5y ago
    Reminds me of the Gavin Belson freakout in Silicon Valley when his holographic call started freezing and they suggested he went to audio only "Fuck you, the audio's still working! Audio worked a hundred fucking years ago!"
- Nbox9 5y ago
  I’m really unsure about this. In 1822 canning food was new technology. 1822 didn’t have electrical generators but 1922 had radios, and the TV was clearly on the horizon. 1922 has the Model-T and airplanes.
  - AnimalMuppet 5y ago
    Let me ask this question: Is the 777 further from the airplanes of 1922 than the airplanes of 1922 are from the hot air balloon? Airplanes existed in 1922. But nobody you knew flew on them. You didn't take them from the US to Europe on business trips; you took a ship. You didn't take them from New York to LA, either; you took a train. You sure didn't book flights online while sitting in your couch at home. The same (in fundamentals) technology existed in 1922. But all the social change came after that.
    - dragontamer 5y ago
      > The same (in fundamentals) technology existed in 1922 The first transatlantic flight by Charles Lindberg was 1927, 5 years _AFTER_ this article was written. People were trying to do a transatlantic flight in the 1920s the same way as we are trying to make hydrogen cars, applicable artificial intelligence (self-driving?), or other "nearly true" things today. There were many notable attempts at a transatlantic flight. As such, the article is able to point out the issues (ex: the lack of oxygen in the upper atmosphere, leading to hypoxia). An individual pilot can do a transatlantic flight with the use of a breathing apparatus, similar to a scuba diver. But large-scale flights wouldn't be possible until the invention of pressurized cabins (used as a secret-weapon during WW2: the US Superfortress Bombers would fly so high thanks to pressurized cabins, that other airplanes couldn't reach them). ------- Predicting a successful transatlantic flight would be like predicting a self-driving car today. We see lots of cool tech demos and people starting to understand the issues / technology... but it clearly doesn't exist yet. Not in any way that's usable. We're probably 5 years off from a plausible tech-demo (ex: Spirit of St. Louis like attempt), and decades away from a commercial offering. Lindberg's flight was of 33-hours. This article is suggesting an 8-hour flight time, well into the realm of science-fiction by 1922 standards. The 400+ gallons of fuel of "The Spirit of St. Louis" was manually strained and manually purified by the team, for no commercial process existed yet to make the fuel pure enough for high reliability. A trans-atlantic flight was "inevitable", because the march of progress over the last 10 years was so dramatic, so incredible, so inspiring, that it almost certainly was going to happen. But it absolutely was still science fiction by 1922 standards.
- ghc 5y ago
  If you think about what they didn't have in 1822 that they did have in 1922: - Radio - Movies - Motorized Rail Transit - Airplanes - Blimps - Recorded Audio - Electrification (esp. lighting) - Telephony - Cars - Subways - Fax - Early Television - Telegraph - Skyscapers - Underwater tunnels - Air Conditioning - Elevators - Modern Hospitals - Machine Guns, Tanks, Dreadnoughts and other tools of modern war - Stock Tickers - Early computing (Tabulators, IBM, etc.) - Modern Steel Manufacturing I would bet that the people of the 1920s would find the world of the 2020s much more recognizable than the people of the 1820s would find the world of the 1920s.
  - netsec_burn 5y ago
    This exact prediction was made in the 1922 article.
    - ghc 5y ago
      That's what this thread is about. Parent of my comment was disputing that prediction from the article, and I presented a counter-argument.
      - netsec_burn 5y ago
        I see! Sorry about the confusion, I misunderstood the context.
  - rbanffy 5y ago
    > I would bet that the people of the 1920s would find the world of the 2020s much more recognizable than the people of the 1820s would find the world of the 1920s. Let's start by explaining smartphones, then Twitter and Facebook and then on how companies used them to hijack elections and destabilize democracies in multiple countries. Or, for an amusing time, try to explain how a cryptocurrency works. My mom, born in 1935, doesn't understand what I do beyond that I write computer programs (which isn't even that much true anymore).
    - 5y ago
- Ostrogodsky 5y ago
  That is one of the most accurate statements of the whole article!!!

by tomxor 5y ago

This is surprisingly accurate, reserved and balanced through the lens of society as well as science. I was expecting something more fanciful like flying horses or whatnot.

Brendinooo 5y ago

Yeah, I think he had a good understanding of the implications of the newer technology of his day. You don't know what you don't know so there's nothing about computers here, but most of this article was really well done.

apozem 5y ago

These are better than 99% of predictions because the author has a good eye for what will change (technology, transportation, consumer goods) and what won’t (human nature).

Aperocky 5y ago

Except that: > I'm sure that technological advancement in 2022 will be amazing, but they will be nothing as amazing as the present day than it is over 100 years ago (i.e. 1822). I don't know about that statement.

another_story 5y ago
Cars, trains, airplanes, electricity used in consumer devices, movies, telephones, radio, instantaneous intercontinental communication, etc... We have some cool stuff compared to 1922, but you could argue the shift was greater.
- feintruled 5y ago
  Reminds me of the Gavin Belson freakout in Silicon Valley when his holographic call started freezing and they suggested he went to audio only "Fuck you, the audio's still working! Audio worked a hundred fucking years ago!"
Nbox9 5y ago
I’m really unsure about this. In 1822 canning food was new technology. 1822 didn’t have electrical generators but 1922 had radios, and the TV was clearly on the horizon. 1922 has the Model-T and airplanes.
- AnimalMuppet 5y ago
  Let me ask this question: Is the 777 further from the airplanes of 1922 than the airplanes of 1922 are from the hot air balloon? Airplanes existed in 1922. But nobody you knew flew on them. You didn't take them from the US to Europe on business trips; you took a ship. You didn't take them from New York to LA, either; you took a train. You sure didn't book flights online while sitting in your couch at home. The same (in fundamentals) technology existed in 1922. But all the social change came after that.
  - dragontamer 5y ago
    > The same (in fundamentals) technology existed in 1922 The first transatlantic flight by Charles Lindberg was 1927, 5 years _AFTER_ this article was written. People were trying to do a transatlantic flight in the 1920s the same way as we are trying to make hydrogen cars, applicable artificial intelligence (self-driving?), or other "nearly true" things today. There were many notable attempts at a transatlantic flight. As such, the article is able to point out the issues (ex: the lack of oxygen in the upper atmosphere, leading to hypoxia). An individual pilot can do a transatlantic flight with the use of a breathing apparatus, similar to a scuba diver. But large-scale flights wouldn't be possible until the invention of pressurized cabins (used as a secret-weapon during WW2: the US Superfortress Bombers would fly so high thanks to pressurized cabins, that other airplanes couldn't reach them). ------- Predicting a successful transatlantic flight would be like predicting a self-driving car today. We see lots of cool tech demos and people starting to understand the issues / technology... but it clearly doesn't exist yet. Not in any way that's usable. We're probably 5 years off from a plausible tech-demo (ex: Spirit of St. Louis like attempt), and decades away from a commercial offering. Lindberg's flight was of 33-hours. This article is suggesting an 8-hour flight time, well into the realm of science-fiction by 1922 standards. The 400+ gallons of fuel of "The Spirit of St. Louis" was manually strained and manually purified by the team, for no commercial process existed yet to make the fuel pure enough for high reliability. A trans-atlantic flight was "inevitable", because the march of progress over the last 10 years was so dramatic, so incredible, so inspiring, that it almost certainly was going to happen. But it absolutely was still science fiction by 1922 standards.
ghc 5y ago
If you think about what they didn't have in 1822 that they did have in 1922: - Radio - Movies - Motorized Rail Transit - Airplanes - Blimps - Recorded Audio - Electrification (esp. lighting) - Telephony - Cars - Subways - Fax - Early Television - Telegraph - Skyscapers - Underwater tunnels - Air Conditioning - Elevators - Modern Hospitals - Machine Guns, Tanks, Dreadnoughts and other tools of modern war - Stock Tickers - Early computing (Tabulators, IBM, etc.) - Modern Steel Manufacturing I would bet that the people of the 1920s would find the world of the 2020s much more recognizable than the people of the 1820s would find the world of the 1920s.
- netsec_burn 5y ago
  This exact prediction was made in the 1922 article.
  - ghc 5y ago
    That's what this thread is about. Parent of my comment was disputing that prediction from the article, and I presented a counter-argument.
    - netsec_burn 5y ago
      I see! Sorry about the confusion, I misunderstood the context.
- rbanffy 5y ago
  > I would bet that the people of the 1920s would find the world of the 2020s much more recognizable than the people of the 1820s would find the world of the 1920s. Let's start by explaining smartphones, then Twitter and Facebook and then on how companies used them to hijack elections and destabilize democracies in multiple countries. Or, for an amusing time, try to explain how a cryptocurrency works. My mom, born in 1935, doesn't understand what I do beyond that I write computer programs (which isn't even that much true anymore).
  - 5y ago
Ostrogodsky 5y ago
That is one of the most accurate statements of the whole article!!!