25 ms·

The world of tomorrow

115 points by diodorus 2y ago

Animats 2y ago
That's the view from a country on the trailing edge. In Shenzhen, or Seoul, or Tskuba, or Tapei you'll find enthusiasm for technology. The US can't even make a smartphone any more. Or electrical distribution equipment. Or telephone central offices. Or TV sets. Next to go, cars. (Chrysler just exited the car business. Minivans only now.)
- 31carmichael 2y ago
  The US still makes some electrical distribution equipment. And the best electrical protection relay company, SEL, is in the US.
- MichaelZuo 2y ago
  Yeah this writer seems confused, by definition any above average group is more likely to regress to the global mean… Than to keep going upwards. That’s the default, so any speculations/arguments/etc… should be written to show why the other direction is more likely than not.
  - ryandrake 2y ago
    It feels like we are instead bifurcating instead of regressing to a mean. The rich are getting richer and moving to one side together as a group, while the middle class and poor are merging the other way into their own "barely hanging on class", distributed around a point far on the other side. The average going up doesn't mean it's a tide that raises all boats.
    - MichaelZuo 2y ago
      Even a 30th percentile US household would be above average globally…?
      - TeMPOraL 2y ago
        If only they also had access to goods and services at globally average prices...
        MichaelZuo 2y ago
        How does that relate to the phenomena of regression to the mean?
        TeMPOraL 2y ago
        In that it's tricky to identify the right mean to measure the regression against.
        MichaelZuo 2y ago
        It doesn’t matter which one you pick, there are no known exceptions to the general phenomena. That’s why I said by definition.
        Danmctree 2y ago
        By what definition? It's certainly possible that some kind of societal bell curve or other distribution can just keep getting wider without meaningful movement of the relative positions of individuals. I don't understand why you assume the most likely behavior is regression to the mean. Especially on short terms that seems weird to assume
        MichaelZuo 2y ago
        Who is assuming a short term?
      - wesapien 2y ago
        Punching down is clealrly a sign of things regressing. The Cantillon effect is what separates the rich and those aren't. Trickle down economics doesn't work. Imagine telling those barely middle and poor Americans you're still doing better than Thais or South Africans. It doesn't help.
- DennisP 2y ago
  For cars the US does have Tesla, Lucid, and Rivian. The first two are vertically integrated, making as many of their own components as possible. We also have Intel, and a pretty great rocket company.
  - TeMPOraL 2y ago
    > For cars the US does have Tesla (...) We also have (...) a pretty great rocket company And yet you all wish you didn't. Well, maybe not everyone, but it's the dominant view. This brings back a memory of a HN comment from a little over a decade ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7885128 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7885128 I'll just quote it in full: <quote cite='natural219'> If you want to track the death of the cultural vision of Silicon Valley -- the belief that some people, at least, can rise above petty human squabbling and competition and are legitimately working to better humanity -- look no further than this thread. Every top comment is a skeptical one. "This is clearly a great PR move, but has no teeth." "How do you enforce this guarantee?" Etc. These are reasonable questions, but as Shaw said, all progress comes from unreasonable men. I cannot help but be fundamentally depressed as I read these comments. In my view, Elon Musk has, moreso than any other human except maybe Bill Gates, given every absolute inch of human effort and genius to fight to solve the world's biggest problems. And all we have for him, after benefiting freely from the fruit of his labor, is skepticism. We want more. It's not enough. It's never enough. Yes, Tesla Motors is a company operating in a media-hyped 2014 America. I know some of you are butthurt that he engages in the same "dishonest" PR tactics that other companies do. GET THE FUCK OVER IT. The end product he's producing will save humanity. That all of America has not rallied behind Musk and Tesla as the most important movement and achievement in the last 100 years of human history absolutely blows my mind. Not only do we not recognize his goals or his achievements, we actively try and bring him down and shit on his accomplishments. "Well, they invented a pretty cool electric motor, sure, but they were kind of dishonest in that one press release that one time." Go fuck yourself. I want to say "I'm done with Hacker News", but we know that's not true. I'm supremely disappointed in all of you. Godspeed, Musk. I thought this was a great announcement, and I'm behind you 100%. I just hope you can finish your work before our shitty, myopic, destructive society tears you down. Here's to faith. </quote> Elon Musk may have changed for the worse since then, but nowhere near as much and as fast as our "shitty, myopic, destructive society", and in particular the Internet commentariat.
- makeitshine 2y ago
  There is plenty of disillusionment with the modern world in China and Taiwan and Korea.
  - cyber_kinetist 2y ago
    ...which is apparent when you see the fertility rates of these countries.
- Saigonautica 2y ago
  I immigrated to Asia around a decade ago and the relative optimism for technology and the future in general is one of the things that struck me as well. I mean, if you look for pessimism you'll find examples of that too -- but in broad strokes I would also describe the average perception as 'enthusiastic'. It's something I've have a hard time explaining to my North American colleagues. Maybe it just has to be experienced?
  - Animats 2y ago
    That's a result of massive recent change. The US hasn't had that, since the basic infrastructure was built long ago.
- Xunxi 2y ago
  There are no consumer drone companies in the U.S. worth talking about right now.
- ben_w 2y ago
  > The US can't even make a smartphone any more Has the US ever made one in the first place? IIRC Apple had to go to China for the first iPhone, were there any brands that could do it all in the US?
  - kevindamm 2y ago
    When Motorola was acquired, a plant was purchased (a formerly Nokia one in Fort Worth, Texas) and the Moto X line was made in the US [0]. It was a short-lived experiment. Motorola was sold to Lenovo, and the plant shut down, within a few years. [0] https://www.theverge.com/2013/9/11/4717796/made-in-america-a-look-inside-motorolas-moto-x-factory https://www.theverge.com/2013/9/11/4717796/made-in-america-a...
    - ben_w 2y ago
      Nice find, short-lived explains why I'd not heard of it.
    - Animats 2y ago
      Early cell phone manufacturing was more automated than it is now. The "brick" type phones (Nokia, etc.) were a stack of boards with cutouts for the thick components. The whole stack was squeezed together and sometimes riveted. So the internals were well-supported and very tough. That kind of assembly could be totally automated. Pick and place to make the boards, stack and rivet to put it together. Modern phones have little pieces and wires all over the place.[1] You'd think these things would be designed for automated assembly, but they're not. [1] https://www.iphoneincanada.ca/2020/11/15/part-2-ifixit-iphone-12-mini-teardown-reveals-more-internals/ https://www.iphoneincanada.ca/2020/11/15/part-2-ifixit-iphon...
  - kasey_junk 2y ago
    Palm pilot was manufactured in the US.
    - ben_w 2y ago
      And wasn't a smart phone.
- chrisco255 2y ago
  The US writes most of the software that powers those devices. It also designs the hardware. It also runs the data centers and backend infrastructure and software required to make those phones useful, like GPS satellites and AWS/Azure. It produces most of the content that people watch on their TVs and much of what they play on their video game systems. The U.S. is a leader in robotics, robotic surgery equipment, self driving, electric cars, space technology, agricultural technology, etc. Chrysler is owned by a French/Dutch company named Stellantis (it was owned by the German Daimler previously). That brand also controls Dodge, Jeep, Ram, etc. so while Chrysler cars and the Chrysler brand have been on a decades long decline, it's hardly an indication of an American exit from car manufacturing. The US is a leader in electic cars, trucks, SUVs, heavy equipment, etc. And even many foreign brands own factories in the U.S. that produce cars here.
  - Novosell 2y ago
    Do you have a source for the US being a "leader" within trucks, SUVs and heavy equipment? Doesn't match my experience as someone not from the US who sees mostly brands not from the US.
  - ThrowawayR2 2y ago
    > "The US writes most of the software that powers those devices." For the moment. Have you noticed how many of those people building that software are immigrants? Most of the FAANGs and other significant tech companies have development centers worldwide and it's vastly easier to pack up and move a software development office elsewhere than it is to move a factory and all its equipment.
- saturn8601 2y ago
  >The US can't even make a smartphone any more. Well they are trying. Purism has a "Made in America" phone: the Liberty Phone. https://puri.sm/products/liberty-phone/ https://puri.sm/products/liberty-phone/ Why do you think cars are leaving the US? Tesla is a fully American manufacturer with some of the most US sourced components, GM/Ford aren't moving their cash cows out of the country anytime soon. and the Japanese and Germans are expanding their presence in the US. You cited a long declining brand that has had an agism problem. Thats your best evidence? I guess you can make the argument that there are too many brands in the car industry but the car manufacturing sector in the US is still quite strong.
Supermancho 2y ago
The productivity increases of the modern times led to a corporate class. These oligarchs have eschewed the progressive initiatives, in eager pursuit of even greater wealth, supported by the wholly owned media and a bribed political class. What has been more evenly distributed globally is the ever-growing poverty, pollution and apathy against these powers. To be fair, some improvements have been made, even at the feet of these giants, driven by government action and populist initiatives. This has been at the cost of concentration and increases in pollution and poverty in the poorest nations. The future looks bleak today, as the divide grows and progressive progress has all but halted.
- ryandrake 2y ago
  We're all so pessimistic about the future not because we think it's going to be captured by the plutocrats and oligarchs, but because we know the future has already been preemptively captured by them. They're all doing the work now to cement their positions in the future, and there's nothing the rest of us can do about it. I don't know what great inventions and technological leaps we are going to see in 2030, 2040, or 2050, but what I do know is that the benefits and wealth from them will be captured by the same class that is capturing everything today.
  - deadbabe 2y ago
    That’s what they want us to believe. But at the end of the day, we can always fight. There’s little they can do to stop a massive violent uprising.
    - TOGoS 2y ago
      Or a massive not-violent one. Just stop working. The ruling class will bring the violence soon enough.
      - vouaobrasil 2y ago
        > Or a massive not-violent one. Just stop working. Can't happen. As soon as significantly many people stop working, the remaining will be offered larger salaries to keep working. That is why revolution against the modern power structure is so hard: because there are economic incentives against revolution for the working class.
negativez 2y ago
> When the future arrived, it felt… ordinary. What happened to the glamour of tomorrow? That's the... subtitle? Thesis statement? It's the first line after the title at any rate. I stopped reading as soon as the first paragraphs felt the need to define glamour. Anyone with a modicum of life experience should already intuit one obvious answer: glamour can only exist in brief moments in reality. "The Future" necessarily only exists in fiction, and fictional works can string together glamourous moments end-to-end indefinitely. But in real life, you can't keep the glamour turned on. People need to defecate, that toilet eventually needs be cleaned, and the sewage treatment plant needs to keep working. People have to start as infants that scream and adults that have to hold them and hear it, then toddlers that make messes everywhere, etc. Maybe dinners could all be glamourous, if you want it bad enough, but are you going to get up, do your makeup and put on your most stylish breakfast clothes everyday? Can you get away with the same outfit at lunch and still be glamorous? "Life" cannot be glamorous unless you are fabulously wealthy AND make very specific life choices.
underlipton 2y ago
Growing up in the oughts, the future was Ghost in the Shell: SAC and Xenosaga and .hack//Sign and Gundam 00. I didn't see the dystopia; I imagined a glass metropolis beside a glittering bay, bleached and blue; VR diving into pools of ephemeral neon filament; trips to a space colony. The ISS had launched when I was in elementary school. 2012 came, and I graduated from college, and the Rift had its Kickstarter. I had a supercomputer in my pocket and a black president. Things seemed on track. Of course, Oculus dragged its feet until it was bought by Facebook, who dragged things even more. Obama droned weddings. The ISS prepares for reentry burn in a few years. Et cetera. All of it - the corporate politicking; the political atrocities; the logarithmic progression of scientific advances, where technological progress is overtaken by the social calamity it unleashes - predicted by the media that had set my mental image of the future in the first place. Whose fault is it that the future failed to materialize again? I'd say corporate greed and the captured institutions that are supposed to police them for the greater good, but the fact that we're seeing the dream die again means that laying blame might be futile (particularly if we're not going to actually do anything about the bad actors). Essentially, the Millennial era has been one where the glamour ghost came a-knockin' again, but the smart people who were paying attention already knew how the story goes. As for the rest of us? Mana du vortes.
- 082349872349872 2y ago
  a view from a generation earlier: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39084117 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39084117 Re: Ghost in the Shell, I find it amusing that Gibson's 1984 opening line: "The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel." used to mean grey, but now could mean bright blue (or even black?) due to the march of progress...
  - jprete 2y ago
    The poetic meaning of the line still works. The sky, the symbol of boundless optimism, the place of open infinite wonder and possibility...reduced to meaninglessness, closed possibilities, and failed promise.
  - underlipton 2y ago
cadamsau 2y ago
I don’t think it’s fair to look at artefacts of a past era and compare them to today. The only things preserved are the ones deemed worthy of preservation. That leads to a skewed perspective.
AIorNot 2y ago
Well to state it somewhat pessimistically: 1. Thoughts about the future always reflect the anxieties and the ambitions of the present. 2. Today's world has become immersed in the dreary and often dystopian reality of that technology. Today we have Black Mirror instead of the Twilight Zone. People are more mature about the impacts of both world changing technologies and cultural paradigms forcing that technology into our lives weather we like it or not. 3. GenZ,Y and younger see Big Tech as evil or invasive but are addicted to it (Social Media, smart phones) in the way Boomers were addicted to cigarettes and TV 4. Our Oligarchical economy pushes us to eat meagerly from the wealth pot, while our day to day lives, from health care, to family cohesion, to social silos due to socializing online instead of in-person, jobs that lay us off at the drop of a hat, online apps that are convenient but remove human interaction and treat us like numbers to be managed. Also all that Impersonal Software that has no soul sucks the soul out of human users. -instead of chatting with the mailman, we get email marketing welcoming our birthdays, now personalized with GenAI. The same issues that we complained about during industrialization of cities gets amplified more with the web and mobile revolution - e.g. we are less socialized.. basically we are more jaded after a century of unbelievable technological innovation.
- 082349872349872 2y ago
  > now personalized with GenAI Has Philip K Dick called the 21st century better than Asimov or Clarke? https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/7444685-the-door-refused-to-open-it-said-five-cents-please https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/7444685-the-door-refused-to...
oldpersonintx 2y ago
[dead]
TeMPOraL 2y ago
Curious. The article mentions Star Trek three times, in all cases referring to The Original Series, while stating that "Outside of niche books and magazines, the golden age of optimistic science fiction did not exist.", which is surprising it how it missed the golden era of Star Trek, beginning with The Next Generation (1987-1994), aka. the reference work for optimistic future in popular sci-fi, subsequently followed by several more series and movies set in the same continuity, culminating with Enterprise (2001 - 2005). That's 18 years of stories about humanity enjoying Fully Automated Luxury Gay Space Communism aka. a post-scarcity society! Seven seasons of a show set on a starship that looks like a luxury hotel inside - because why wouldn't it be? People still joke about the carpets on starships (including in-universe in the recent shows), but honestly, you can pretty much measure how we've lost the optimistic future by tracking how Star Trek shows (including the post-2005 ones) got darker (literally, I'm talking about how the scenes were lit), the architecture less Hilton-like, and eventually, when carpets started to disappear. Apropos visual media, there's another example of an optimistic vision of the future, which the article also indirectly mentions: Disney's Tomorrowland - not the fair, the 2015 movie. Severely underrated, that one. I broke down in tears when I watched it (okay, I was in a vulnerable period), because it was an unexpected breath of pure optimism about progress. I mean, the movie is literally about the very thing the article talks about - it recalls the optimism of yore, presents a protagonist who's asking herself and us, where did it all go wrong, and then tackles the question directly. The answer it gives may or may not be any good[0], but at least an attempt was made to talk about it. Sadly, this is the last attempt made so far in popular media, at least as far as I know. I'm puzzled as to why these two stories were not mentioned. They're not exactly outliers no one has heard of. -- [0] - We're effectively fucking our own future up by only ever talking about disasters - past ones, current ones, and every plausible prediction of future ones - in a feedback loop with news and entertainment; we're simmering in despair, securing a doomed future by not being able to envision anything good as a society.
- PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
  > measure how we've lost the optimistic future by tracking how Star Trek shows (including the post-2005 ones) got darker (literally, I'm talking about how the scenes were lit), the architecture less Hilton-like, and eventually, when carpets started to disappear. Yes, you could do that. Or you could just cite "Alien" (and arguably "Dark Star" before it) as the key break with "the future is bright and shiny and comfortable", long before 2005.
avmich 2y ago
> Like Peter Thiel’s famous complaint that ‘we wanted flying cars, instead we got 140 characters’ Wonder how it feels to be famous for a whining.
- cassianoleal 2y ago
  This series might give you some insights. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfXbyQ9KFdg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfXbyQ9KFdg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AeDA8hwQ3Fo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AeDA8hwQ3Fo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX-EgbauuOo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX-EgbauuOo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8fBqRa2NLQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8fBqRa2NLQ
Sharlin 2y ago
Earlier submission with some comments: https://worksinprogress.co/issue/the-world-of-tomorrow/ https://worksinprogress.co/issue/the-world-of-tomorrow/ Also, obligatory meta complaint: the site seems to break trackpad forward/back gestures at least on Firefox :/
- GoatOfAplomb 2y ago
  That URL goes to the essay itself. Here's an earlier submission with comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42355160 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42355160
  - Sharlin 2y ago
    Uf, thanks, a copypaste brain fart.
rkagerer 2y ago
When the future arrived, it felt… ordinary. What happened to the glamour of tomorrow? While I share your lament, witnessing feats like a Starship getting caught by giant chopsticks feels pretty darned extraordinary!
- consf 2y ago
  [dead]
- meiraleal 2y ago
  I'm wondering if the future arrived just for people of 30 years or older. The past 15 years changed very slowly compared to 15 years before. The expectations of what's futuristic for someone 25 years old today is quite different than of the ones older.
animal531 2y ago
As a kid I loved watching Beyond 2000 which basically featured all kinds of new inventions, prototypes and ideas. In a lot of ways it was the same as reading physorg or other sites that are filled with new groundbreaking research, most of which we will never hear from again.
openrisk 2y ago
A great essay, worthy of detailed reading as it contains so many interesting connections and associations from the past to explain the present and maybe forecast the future. Just one example among the many: > Making family-sized dwellings abundant and thus affordable for most people would be the single most effective step toward restoring faith in progress. We are drowning in stochastic parrots and cryptographically minted "wealth" while very fundamental aspects of wellbeing are delegated to the dysfunctional, stagnating "technologies" of yesteryear. My only criticism would be the subtitle: no, the future when it arrived did not feel ordinary. It felt disconnected from the human predicament and ominous about our prospects.
- chrisco255 2y ago
  The affordability crisis is entirely a function of over regulation and NIMBYism. Supply and demand are economic laws and it turns out when you restrict supply and demand is held constant or increases, prices skyrocket.
  - Nevermark 2y ago
    Taxing property on land, as well as the land, creates perverse incentives & disincentives. If we only taxed land, renormalizing for the same total taxes: 1. It would be much more expensive to hold (absolutely or relatively) undeveloped land as an investment that parasitically increased in value due to surrounding investment. Land is the exclusionary resource, so fully taxing it makes sense. Renormalization would tax unused land hard, reducing its passive return, and the supply & availability of less used land will increase, and prices decrease. 2. It would be far more attractive to further develop land for economically rewarding use, since adding living spaces and other increased use would not directly raise annual taxes. Which today are essentially a heavy disincentive to development. Ironically, property (excluding land) taxes, are a recurrent never ending wealth tax, inhibiting both the wealthy and non-wealthy from increasing their properties utility value. We are so used to it we don’t really consider how much it warps our choices that putting in capital or labor into home improvements or increased multi-housing actually raises our taxes. If they didn’t, improvements would be far more attractive for both utility and property value appreciation. Ask any accountant.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
JackMorgan 2y ago
Fascinating read. This explains so much of the "crafts" movement I see in myself and friends. Bad food and shoddy material goods are practically free for a middle class person. It's easy to visit a big box store and get cheap, mass produced garbage. Food filled with preservatives, added sugar, and salt. Sawdust furniture that will barely stand up after assembly. Now so many people are getting into gardening, woodworking, and fitness. There's so much value in working with our hands after a day filled with zoom meetings.
0xDEAFBEAD 2y ago
I read this blog post the other day about the hedonic treadmill that influenced my thinking a lot: https://www.optimallyirrational.com/p/the-aim-of-maximising-happiness-is https://www.optimallyirrational.com/p/the-aim-of-maximising-... Consider this 1940s ad for a "house that runs like magic", powered by gas: https://wip.gatspress.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/AGAAd-1944-RGB-982x1280.jpg https://wip.gatspress.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/AGAAd-1... I'm already living this dream life from the 1940s. I have a range, a refrigerator, "permanent hot springs", heating, and air conditioning. I've had that stuff all my life. It's normal for me. I don't appreciate it. Perhaps in addition to Progress Studies, we need some sort of neo-mindfulness gratitude journaling movement, focused on appreciating all of the awesome technology that's already widespread. People demonstrate sophistication by explaining why things suck. It's not cool or fashionable to dwell on life's simple pleasures. Perhaps it's time to take a bold stand for naivete. https://xkcd.com/606/ https://xkcd.com/606/
- Gravityloss 2y ago
  One can go hiking or kayaking for a few nights or even just try to pitch a tent when it's sleeting. Ordinary stuff can feel much more appreciable after that. For a short while only though!
  - JackMorgan 2y ago
    I hiked 1000 miles on the AT in the winter of '22, and to this day I marvel at potable water on tap, AND it gets hot! Too hot even! What a delight. Also plumbing and a bidet! No catholes, no rashes, no norovirus! I wake up every day with gratitude in my heart for this abundance.
- evrimoztamur 2y ago
  Recently, I've been thinking a lot about the incredible conveniences we have at our disposal. Yet there are still many places around the world today which do not have clean water, let alone hot clean water, immediately, whenever. Refrigeration, painkillers, free time for hobbies, arts, and sports. Once you start thinking about all the things you already have, asking for more seems selfish. All I wish for is these 'basic' conveniences for everybody in the world, not just me and my peers.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
consf 2y ago
[dead]
cyber_kinetist 2y ago
Related reading: "Of Flying Cars and the Declining Rate of Profit" by David Graeber: https://thebaffler.com/salvos/of-flying-cars-and-the-declining-rate-of-profit https://thebaffler.com/salvos/of-flying-cars-and-the-declini...
- mitchbob 2y ago
  https://archive.ph/2024.08.26-162159/https://thebaffler.com/salvos/of-flying-cars-and-the-declining-rate-of-profit https://archive.ph/2024.08.26-162159/https://thebaffler.com/...
CatWChainsaw 2y ago
Tomorrow is hell. https://collapsetastic.substack.com/p/the-endgame https://collapsetastic.substack.com/p/the-endgame
srkiNZ 2y ago
Great essay! Really seems to have tuned into the current feelings of cynicism and loss of belief in progress as a tool for a better future. Reading the comments, it feels like a lot of people seem to have read this as an anti-capitalist piece? I didn't get that personally

115 points by diodorus 2y ago

That's the view from a country on the trailing edge. In Shenzhen, or Seoul, or Tskuba, or Tapei you'll find enthusiasm for technology. The US can't even make a smartphone any more. Or electrical distribution equipment. Or telephone central offices. Or TV sets. Next to go, cars. (Chrysler just exited the car business. Minivans only now.)

31carmichael 2y ago
The US still makes some electrical distribution equipment. And the best electrical protection relay company, SEL, is in the US.
MichaelZuo 2y ago
Yeah this writer seems confused, by definition any above average group is more likely to regress to the global mean… Than to keep going upwards. That’s the default, so any speculations/arguments/etc… should be written to show why the other direction is more likely than not.
- ryandrake 2y ago
  It feels like we are instead bifurcating instead of regressing to a mean. The rich are getting richer and moving to one side together as a group, while the middle class and poor are merging the other way into their own "barely hanging on class", distributed around a point far on the other side. The average going up doesn't mean it's a tide that raises all boats.
  - MichaelZuo 2y ago
    Even a 30th percentile US household would be above average globally…?
    - TeMPOraL 2y ago
      If only they also had access to goods and services at globally average prices...
      - MichaelZuo 2y ago
        How does that relate to the phenomena of regression to the mean?
        TeMPOraL 2y ago
        In that it's tricky to identify the right mean to measure the regression against.
        MichaelZuo 2y ago
        It doesn’t matter which one you pick, there are no known exceptions to the general phenomena. That’s why I said by definition.
        Danmctree 2y ago
        By what definition? It's certainly possible that some kind of societal bell curve or other distribution can just keep getting wider without meaningful movement of the relative positions of individuals. I don't understand why you assume the most likely behavior is regression to the mean. Especially on short terms that seems weird to assume
        MichaelZuo 2y ago
        Who is assuming a short term?
    - wesapien 2y ago
      Punching down is clealrly a sign of things regressing. The Cantillon effect is what separates the rich and those aren't. Trickle down economics doesn't work. Imagine telling those barely middle and poor Americans you're still doing better than Thais or South Africans. It doesn't help.
DennisP 2y ago
For cars the US does have Tesla, Lucid, and Rivian. The first two are vertically integrated, making as many of their own components as possible. We also have Intel, and a pretty great rocket company.
- TeMPOraL 2y ago
  > For cars the US does have Tesla (...) We also have (...) a pretty great rocket company And yet you all wish you didn't. Well, maybe not everyone, but it's the dominant view. This brings back a memory of a HN comment from a little over a decade ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7885128 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7885128 I'll just quote it in full: <quote cite='natural219'> If you want to track the death of the cultural vision of Silicon Valley -- the belief that some people, at least, can rise above petty human squabbling and competition and are legitimately working to better humanity -- look no further than this thread. Every top comment is a skeptical one. "This is clearly a great PR move, but has no teeth." "How do you enforce this guarantee?" Etc. These are reasonable questions, but as Shaw said, all progress comes from unreasonable men. I cannot help but be fundamentally depressed as I read these comments. In my view, Elon Musk has, moreso than any other human except maybe Bill Gates, given every absolute inch of human effort and genius to fight to solve the world's biggest problems. And all we have for him, after benefiting freely from the fruit of his labor, is skepticism. We want more. It's not enough. It's never enough. Yes, Tesla Motors is a company operating in a media-hyped 2014 America. I know some of you are butthurt that he engages in the same "dishonest" PR tactics that other companies do. GET THE FUCK OVER IT. The end product he's producing will save humanity. That all of America has not rallied behind Musk and Tesla as the most important movement and achievement in the last 100 years of human history absolutely blows my mind. Not only do we not recognize his goals or his achievements, we actively try and bring him down and shit on his accomplishments. "Well, they invented a pretty cool electric motor, sure, but they were kind of dishonest in that one press release that one time." Go fuck yourself. I want to say "I'm done with Hacker News", but we know that's not true. I'm supremely disappointed in all of you. Godspeed, Musk. I thought this was a great announcement, and I'm behind you 100%. I just hope you can finish your work before our shitty, myopic, destructive society tears you down. Here's to faith. </quote> Elon Musk may have changed for the worse since then, but nowhere near as much and as fast as our "shitty, myopic, destructive society", and in particular the Internet commentariat.
makeitshine 2y ago
There is plenty of disillusionment with the modern world in China and Taiwan and Korea.
- cyber_kinetist 2y ago
  ...which is apparent when you see the fertility rates of these countries.
Saigonautica 2y ago
I immigrated to Asia around a decade ago and the relative optimism for technology and the future in general is one of the things that struck me as well. I mean, if you look for pessimism you'll find examples of that too -- but in broad strokes I would also describe the average perception as 'enthusiastic'. It's something I've have a hard time explaining to my North American colleagues. Maybe it just has to be experienced?
- Animats 2y ago
  That's a result of massive recent change. The US hasn't had that, since the basic infrastructure was built long ago.
Xunxi 2y ago
There are no consumer drone companies in the U.S. worth talking about right now.
ben_w 2y ago
> The US can't even make a smartphone any more Has the US ever made one in the first place? IIRC Apple had to go to China for the first iPhone, were there any brands that could do it all in the US?
- kevindamm 2y ago
  When Motorola was acquired, a plant was purchased (a formerly Nokia one in Fort Worth, Texas) and the Moto X line was made in the US [0]. It was a short-lived experiment. Motorola was sold to Lenovo, and the plant shut down, within a few years. [0] https://www.theverge.com/2013/9/11/4717796/made-in-america-a-look-inside-motorolas-moto-x-factory https://www.theverge.com/2013/9/11/4717796/made-in-america-a...
  - ben_w 2y ago
    Nice find, short-lived explains why I'd not heard of it.
  - Animats 2y ago
    Early cell phone manufacturing was more automated than it is now. The "brick" type phones (Nokia, etc.) were a stack of boards with cutouts for the thick components. The whole stack was squeezed together and sometimes riveted. So the internals were well-supported and very tough. That kind of assembly could be totally automated. Pick and place to make the boards, stack and rivet to put it together. Modern phones have little pieces and wires all over the place.[1] You'd think these things would be designed for automated assembly, but they're not. [1] https://www.iphoneincanada.ca/2020/11/15/part-2-ifixit-iphone-12-mini-teardown-reveals-more-internals/ https://www.iphoneincanada.ca/2020/11/15/part-2-ifixit-iphon...
- kasey_junk 2y ago
  Palm pilot was manufactured in the US.
  - ben_w 2y ago
    And wasn't a smart phone.
chrisco255 2y ago
The US writes most of the software that powers those devices. It also designs the hardware. It also runs the data centers and backend infrastructure and software required to make those phones useful, like GPS satellites and AWS/Azure. It produces most of the content that people watch on their TVs and much of what they play on their video game systems. The U.S. is a leader in robotics, robotic surgery equipment, self driving, electric cars, space technology, agricultural technology, etc. Chrysler is owned by a French/Dutch company named Stellantis (it was owned by the German Daimler previously). That brand also controls Dodge, Jeep, Ram, etc. so while Chrysler cars and the Chrysler brand have been on a decades long decline, it's hardly an indication of an American exit from car manufacturing. The US is a leader in electic cars, trucks, SUVs, heavy equipment, etc. And even many foreign brands own factories in the U.S. that produce cars here.
- Novosell 2y ago
  Do you have a source for the US being a "leader" within trucks, SUVs and heavy equipment? Doesn't match my experience as someone not from the US who sees mostly brands not from the US.
- ThrowawayR2 2y ago
  > "The US writes most of the software that powers those devices." For the moment. Have you noticed how many of those people building that software are immigrants? Most of the FAANGs and other significant tech companies have development centers worldwide and it's vastly easier to pack up and move a software development office elsewhere than it is to move a factory and all its equipment.
saturn8601 2y ago
>The US can't even make a smartphone any more. Well they are trying. Purism has a "Made in America" phone: the Liberty Phone. https://puri.sm/products/liberty-phone/ https://puri.sm/products/liberty-phone/ Why do you think cars are leaving the US? Tesla is a fully American manufacturer with some of the most US sourced components, GM/Ford aren't moving their cash cows out of the country anytime soon. and the Japanese and Germans are expanding their presence in the US. You cited a long declining brand that has had an agism problem. Thats your best evidence? I guess you can make the argument that there are too many brands in the car industry but the car manufacturing sector in the US is still quite strong.

Supermancho 2y ago

The productivity increases of the modern times led to a corporate class. These oligarchs have eschewed the progressive initiatives, in eager pursuit of even greater wealth, supported by the wholly owned media and a bribed political class. What has been more evenly distributed globally is the ever-growing poverty, pollution and apathy against these powers. To be fair, some improvements have been made, even at the feet of these giants, driven by government action and populist initiatives. This has been at the cost of concentration and increases in pollution and poverty in the poorest nations. The future looks bleak today, as the divide grows and progressive progress has all but halted.

ryandrake 2y ago
We're all so pessimistic about the future not because we think it's going to be captured by the plutocrats and oligarchs, but because we know the future has already been preemptively captured by them. They're all doing the work now to cement their positions in the future, and there's nothing the rest of us can do about it. I don't know what great inventions and technological leaps we are going to see in 2030, 2040, or 2050, but what I do know is that the benefits and wealth from them will be captured by the same class that is capturing everything today.
- deadbabe 2y ago
  That’s what they want us to believe. But at the end of the day, we can always fight. There’s little they can do to stop a massive violent uprising.
  - TOGoS 2y ago
    Or a massive not-violent one. Just stop working. The ruling class will bring the violence soon enough.
    - vouaobrasil 2y ago
      > Or a massive not-violent one. Just stop working. Can't happen. As soon as significantly many people stop working, the remaining will be offered larger salaries to keep working. That is why revolution against the modern power structure is so hard: because there are economic incentives against revolution for the working class.

negativez 2y ago

> When the future arrived, it felt… ordinary. What happened to the glamour of tomorrow? That's the... subtitle? Thesis statement? It's the first line after the title at any rate. I stopped reading as soon as the first paragraphs felt the need to define glamour. Anyone with a modicum of life experience should already intuit one obvious answer: glamour can only exist in brief moments in reality. "The Future" necessarily only exists in fiction, and fictional works can string together glamourous moments end-to-end indefinitely. But in real life, you can't keep the glamour turned on. People need to defecate, that toilet eventually needs be cleaned, and the sewage treatment plant needs to keep working. People have to start as infants that scream and adults that have to hold them and hear it, then toddlers that make messes everywhere, etc. Maybe dinners could all be glamourous, if you want it bad enough, but are you going to get up, do your makeup and put on your most stylish breakfast clothes everyday? Can you get away with the same outfit at lunch and still be glamorous? "Life" cannot be glamorous unless you are fabulously wealthy AND make very specific life choices.

underlipton 2y ago

Growing up in the oughts, the future was Ghost in the Shell: SAC and Xenosaga and .hack//Sign and Gundam 00. I didn't see the dystopia; I imagined a glass metropolis beside a glittering bay, bleached and blue; VR diving into pools of ephemeral neon filament; trips to a space colony. The ISS had launched when I was in elementary school. 2012 came, and I graduated from college, and the Rift had its Kickstarter. I had a supercomputer in my pocket and a black president. Things seemed on track. Of course, Oculus dragged its feet until it was bought by Facebook, who dragged things even more. Obama droned weddings. The ISS prepares for reentry burn in a few years. Et cetera. All of it - the corporate politicking; the political atrocities; the logarithmic progression of scientific advances, where technological progress is overtaken by the social calamity it unleashes - predicted by the media that had set my mental image of the future in the first place. Whose fault is it that the future failed to materialize again? I'd say corporate greed and the captured institutions that are supposed to police them for the greater good, but the fact that we're seeing the dream die again means that laying blame might be futile (particularly if we're not going to actually do anything about the bad actors). Essentially, the Millennial era has been one where the glamour ghost came a-knockin' again, but the smart people who were paying attention already knew how the story goes. As for the rest of us? Mana du vortes.

082349872349872 2y ago
a view from a generation earlier: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39084117 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39084117 Re: Ghost in the Shell, I find it amusing that Gibson's 1984 opening line: "The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel." used to mean grey, but now could mean bright blue (or even black?) due to the march of progress...
- jprete 2y ago
  The poetic meaning of the line still works. The sky, the symbol of boundless optimism, the place of open infinite wonder and possibility...reduced to meaninglessness, closed possibilities, and failed promise.
- underlipton 2y ago

cadamsau 2y ago

I don’t think it’s fair to look at artefacts of a past era and compare them to today. The only things preserved are the ones deemed worthy of preservation. That leads to a skewed perspective.

AIorNot 2y ago

Well to state it somewhat pessimistically: 1. Thoughts about the future always reflect the anxieties and the ambitions of the present. 2. Today's world has become immersed in the dreary and often dystopian reality of that technology. Today we have Black Mirror instead of the Twilight Zone. People are more mature about the impacts of both world changing technologies and cultural paradigms forcing that technology into our lives weather we like it or not. 3. GenZ,Y and younger see Big Tech as evil or invasive but are addicted to it (Social Media, smart phones) in the way Boomers were addicted to cigarettes and TV 4. Our Oligarchical economy pushes us to eat meagerly from the wealth pot, while our day to day lives, from health care, to family cohesion, to social silos due to socializing online instead of in-person, jobs that lay us off at the drop of a hat, online apps that are convenient but remove human interaction and treat us like numbers to be managed. Also all that Impersonal Software that has no soul sucks the soul out of human users. -instead of chatting with the mailman, we get email marketing welcoming our birthdays, now personalized with GenAI. The same issues that we complained about during industrialization of cities gets amplified more with the web and mobile revolution - e.g. we are less socialized.. basically we are more jaded after a century of unbelievable technological innovation.

082349872349872 2y ago
> now personalized with GenAI Has Philip K Dick called the 21st century better than Asimov or Clarke? https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/7444685-the-door-refused-to-open-it-said-five-cents-please https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/7444685-the-door-refused-to...

oldpersonintx 2y ago

[dead]

TeMPOraL 2y ago

Curious. The article mentions Star Trek three times, in all cases referring to The Original Series, while stating that "Outside of niche books and magazines, the golden age of optimistic science fiction did not exist.", which is surprising it how it missed the golden era of Star Trek, beginning with The Next Generation (1987-1994), aka. the reference work for optimistic future in popular sci-fi, subsequently followed by several more series and movies set in the same continuity, culminating with Enterprise (2001 - 2005). That's 18 years of stories about humanity enjoying Fully Automated Luxury Gay Space Communism aka. a post-scarcity society! Seven seasons of a show set on a starship that looks like a luxury hotel inside - because why wouldn't it be? People still joke about the carpets on starships (including in-universe in the recent shows), but honestly, you can pretty much measure how we've lost the optimistic future by tracking how Star Trek shows (including the post-2005 ones) got darker (literally, I'm talking about how the scenes were lit), the architecture less Hilton-like, and eventually, when carpets started to disappear. Apropos visual media, there's another example of an optimistic vision of the future, which the article also indirectly mentions: Disney's Tomorrowland - not the fair, the 2015 movie. Severely underrated, that one. I broke down in tears when I watched it (okay, I was in a vulnerable period), because it was an unexpected breath of pure optimism about progress. I mean, the movie is literally about the very thing the article talks about - it recalls the optimism of yore, presents a protagonist who's asking herself and us, where did it all go wrong, and then tackles the question directly. The answer it gives may or may not be any good[0], but at least an attempt was made to talk about it. Sadly, this is the last attempt made so far in popular media, at least as far as I know. I'm puzzled as to why these two stories were not mentioned. They're not exactly outliers no one has heard of. -- [0] - We're effectively fucking our own future up by only ever talking about disasters - past ones, current ones, and every plausible prediction of future ones - in a feedback loop with news and entertainment; we're simmering in despair, securing a doomed future by not being able to envision anything good as a society.

PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
> measure how we've lost the optimistic future by tracking how Star Trek shows (including the post-2005 ones) got darker (literally, I'm talking about how the scenes were lit), the architecture less Hilton-like, and eventually, when carpets started to disappear. Yes, you could do that. Or you could just cite "Alien" (and arguably "Dark Star" before it) as the key break with "the future is bright and shiny and comfortable", long before 2005.

avmich 2y ago

> Like Peter Thiel’s famous complaint that ‘we wanted flying cars, instead we got 140 characters’ Wonder how it feels to be famous for a whining.

cassianoleal 2y ago
This series might give you some insights. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfXbyQ9KFdg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfXbyQ9KFdg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AeDA8hwQ3Fo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AeDA8hwQ3Fo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX-EgbauuOo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX-EgbauuOo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8fBqRa2NLQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8fBqRa2NLQ

Sharlin 2y ago

Earlier submission with some comments: https://worksinprogress.co/issue/the-world-of-tomorrow/ https://worksinprogress.co/issue/the-world-of-tomorrow/ Also, obligatory meta complaint: the site seems to break trackpad forward/back gestures at least on Firefox :/

GoatOfAplomb 2y ago
That URL goes to the essay itself. Here's an earlier submission with comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42355160 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42355160
- Sharlin 2y ago
  Uf, thanks, a copypaste brain fart.

rkagerer 2y ago

When the future arrived, it felt… ordinary. What happened to the glamour of tomorrow? While I share your lament, witnessing feats like a Starship getting caught by giant chopsticks feels pretty darned extraordinary!

consf 2y ago
[dead]
meiraleal 2y ago
I'm wondering if the future arrived just for people of 30 years or older. The past 15 years changed very slowly compared to 15 years before. The expectations of what's futuristic for someone 25 years old today is quite different than of the ones older.

animal531 2y ago

As a kid I loved watching Beyond 2000 which basically featured all kinds of new inventions, prototypes and ideas. In a lot of ways it was the same as reading physorg or other sites that are filled with new groundbreaking research, most of which we will never hear from again.

openrisk 2y ago

A great essay, worthy of detailed reading as it contains so many interesting connections and associations from the past to explain the present and maybe forecast the future. Just one example among the many: > Making family-sized dwellings abundant and thus affordable for most people would be the single most effective step toward restoring faith in progress. We are drowning in stochastic parrots and cryptographically minted "wealth" while very fundamental aspects of wellbeing are delegated to the dysfunctional, stagnating "technologies" of yesteryear. My only criticism would be the subtitle: no, the future when it arrived did not feel ordinary. It felt disconnected from the human predicament and ominous about our prospects.

chrisco255 2y ago
The affordability crisis is entirely a function of over regulation and NIMBYism. Supply and demand are economic laws and it turns out when you restrict supply and demand is held constant or increases, prices skyrocket.
- Nevermark 2y ago
  Taxing property on land, as well as the land, creates perverse incentives & disincentives. If we only taxed land, renormalizing for the same total taxes: 1. It would be much more expensive to hold (absolutely or relatively) undeveloped land as an investment that parasitically increased in value due to surrounding investment. Land is the exclusionary resource, so fully taxing it makes sense. Renormalization would tax unused land hard, reducing its passive return, and the supply & availability of less used land will increase, and prices decrease. 2. It would be far more attractive to further develop land for economically rewarding use, since adding living spaces and other increased use would not directly raise annual taxes. Which today are essentially a heavy disincentive to development. Ironically, property (excluding land) taxes, are a recurrent never ending wealth tax, inhibiting both the wealthy and non-wealthy from increasing their properties utility value. We are so used to it we don’t really consider how much it warps our choices that putting in capital or labor into home improvements or increased multi-housing actually raises our taxes. If they didn’t, improvements would be far more attractive for both utility and property value appreciation. Ask any accountant.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

JackMorgan 2y ago

Fascinating read. This explains so much of the "crafts" movement I see in myself and friends. Bad food and shoddy material goods are practically free for a middle class person. It's easy to visit a big box store and get cheap, mass produced garbage. Food filled with preservatives, added sugar, and salt. Sawdust furniture that will barely stand up after assembly. Now so many people are getting into gardening, woodworking, and fitness. There's so much value in working with our hands after a day filled with zoom meetings.

0xDEAFBEAD 2y ago

I read this blog post the other day about the hedonic treadmill that influenced my thinking a lot: https://www.optimallyirrational.com/p/the-aim-of-maximising-happiness-is https://www.optimallyirrational.com/p/the-aim-of-maximising-... Consider this 1940s ad for a "house that runs like magic", powered by gas: https://wip.gatspress.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/AGAAd-1944-RGB-982x1280.jpg https://wip.gatspress.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/AGAAd-1... I'm already living this dream life from the 1940s. I have a range, a refrigerator, "permanent hot springs", heating, and air conditioning. I've had that stuff all my life. It's normal for me. I don't appreciate it. Perhaps in addition to Progress Studies, we need some sort of neo-mindfulness gratitude journaling movement, focused on appreciating all of the awesome technology that's already widespread. People demonstrate sophistication by explaining why things suck. It's not cool or fashionable to dwell on life's simple pleasures. Perhaps it's time to take a bold stand for naivete. https://xkcd.com/606/ https://xkcd.com/606/

Gravityloss 2y ago
One can go hiking or kayaking for a few nights or even just try to pitch a tent when it's sleeting. Ordinary stuff can feel much more appreciable after that. For a short while only though!
- JackMorgan 2y ago
  I hiked 1000 miles on the AT in the winter of '22, and to this day I marvel at potable water on tap, AND it gets hot! Too hot even! What a delight. Also plumbing and a bidet! No catholes, no rashes, no norovirus! I wake up every day with gratitude in my heart for this abundance.
evrimoztamur 2y ago
Recently, I've been thinking a lot about the incredible conveniences we have at our disposal. Yet there are still many places around the world today which do not have clean water, let alone hot clean water, immediately, whenever. Refrigeration, painkillers, free time for hobbies, arts, and sports. Once you start thinking about all the things you already have, asking for more seems selfish. All I wish for is these 'basic' conveniences for everybody in the world, not just me and my peers.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

consf 2y ago

[dead]

cyber_kinetist 2y ago

Related reading: "Of Flying Cars and the Declining Rate of Profit" by David Graeber: https://thebaffler.com/salvos/of-flying-cars-and-the-declining-rate-of-profit https://thebaffler.com/salvos/of-flying-cars-and-the-declini...

mitchbob 2y ago
https://archive.ph/2024.08.26-162159/https://thebaffler.com/salvos/of-flying-cars-and-the-declining-rate-of-profit https://archive.ph/2024.08.26-162159/https://thebaffler.com/...

CatWChainsaw 2y ago

Tomorrow is hell. https://collapsetastic.substack.com/p/the-endgame https://collapsetastic.substack.com/p/the-endgame

srkiNZ 2y ago

Great essay! Really seems to have tuned into the current feelings of cynicism and loss of belief in progress as a tool for a better future. Reading the comments, it feels like a lot of people seem to have read this as an anti-capitalist piece? I didn't get that personally