4 ms·

The last century was so exciting and filled with wonder of technology and the future. Unfortunately, popular feelings are somehow much more negative now, even t

The last century was so exciting and filled with wonder of technology and the future. Unfortunately, popular feelings are somehow much more negative now, even though we've still got mind-boggling technology being developed like AI, self driving cars, cheaper access to space, autonomous drones, and even finally flying cars are being attempted in a new and more hopeful way than before. I blame climate change for a culture of negativity.

kjellsbells 1y ago
More like the 1960s. For example, looking at old National Geographics and pop sci magazines you see an incredible optimism and respect for science, engineering, and the orgs that did them. All those "atomics of the future"-type stuff. What changed was that the wall of secrecy broke down and stories of pollution, corruption, and all around bad behavior hit the public like a tsunami. Then we learned that governments had been lying to us over things like Vietnam, with the Pentagon Papers, Watergate etc. Pretty hard to be positive after that. The computerization of the 1970s through 1990s was broadly positively perceived until the 2000s when it became undeniable that Big Tech would do anything to harvest users. Cambridge Analytica. Cutting off Netscape's air supply. Embrace, extend, and extinguish. There are not many reasons to be optimistic.
- adastra22 1y ago
  I think that was more of the 1950’s, to be pedantic. The 60’s was starting to be more scary with the turning up of the Cold War.
stahtops 1y ago
Climate change is the source of negativity? In the 90s there was the hole in the ozone layer. Instead of acting like the slack jawed idiots in the current administration and basically saying “LOL FUCK YOU NERDS”, we banned CFCs. Nothing you listed actually helps most people. AI? Another way for untalented people to fake it and profit. Self Driving Car*. Waymo, everything else is trash. Mostly putting a human out of a job. Access to space? Great for academics and strategic defense. Maybe the common man will get some transport benefit out of it? Not yet. Autonomous drones? So we can kill each other better. Oh and the drone shows, definitely worth it. Flying cars? Ha. Hahaha. Ok. A trained pilot got crashed into while landing at an airport, this year. It’s not going to be a thing without being fully autonomous. But killing people probably makes more money.
- cluckindan 1y ago
  The ozone hole is still appearing annually, btw. https://ozonewatch.gsfc.nasa.gov/ https://ozonewatch.gsfc.nasa.gov/ Each year for the past few decades during the Southern Hemisphere spring, chemical reactions involving chlorine and bromine cause ozone in the southern polar region to be destroyed rapidly and severely. This depleted region is known as the “ozone hole”
  - stahtops 1y ago
    https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/38685/the-ozone-layer-if-cfcs-hadnt-been-banned https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/38685/the-ozone-lay...
- foxglacier 1y ago
  You're talking pragmatically like someone who's not excited about the future. Of course you can find problems with any technology if you feel negative about it. These things aren't exciting because they clearly meet some need with no harmful side effects but because they leave a wide open future of unknown possibilities. Yes autonomy is how modern flying cars are expected to be controlled. That's one of the enabling technologies, that you could imagine (if you're excited about the future) leads to a Jetsons style streams of cars in the sky where it's too complex for humans to pilot them directly. > AI? Another way for untalented people to fake it and profit. You could also call it another way for untalented people to provide value to society. You want to gatekeep productive work to some elites who "deserve" to profit from it even if that means limiting the amount of good it can do to everyone. You want to stop the world getting better? Why? To protect "talented" people's rent-seeking?
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
bloomingeek 1y ago
The last century also brought us world wars and racism at all costs. The so called "great generation" (What a joke!), could very well have destroyed all of mankind. Then there's the "boomers". (my godforsaken generation) We have gone out of our way to politically ruin our nation, all for the sake of a lunatic, reality TV star who only cares about power and money. (A convicted felon was elected president?!?) Our vanity knows no bounds! Now you're praising technologies that won't help the poor or make most people's lives more meaningful because they will be monetized to the point of uselessness. Sheesh!
- foxglacier 1y ago
  > monetized to the point of uselessness If they become useless, they won't have a place in the market anymore. Do you really believe self-driving cars will never be useful because the companies controlling them will try to extract too much profit?
  - bloomingeek 1y ago
    Yes, because poor people and others won't be able to afford the products. The more the underfunded people don't get to use the technology, the more it become useless.

kjellsbells 1y ago

More like the 1960s. For example, looking at old National Geographics and pop sci magazines you see an incredible optimism and respect for science, engineering, and the orgs that did them. All those "atomics of the future"-type stuff. What changed was that the wall of secrecy broke down and stories of pollution, corruption, and all around bad behavior hit the public like a tsunami. Then we learned that governments had been lying to us over things like Vietnam, with the Pentagon Papers, Watergate etc. Pretty hard to be positive after that. The computerization of the 1970s through 1990s was broadly positively perceived until the 2000s when it became undeniable that Big Tech would do anything to harvest users. Cambridge Analytica. Cutting off Netscape's air supply. Embrace, extend, and extinguish. There are not many reasons to be optimistic.

adastra22 1y ago
I think that was more of the 1950’s, to be pedantic. The 60’s was starting to be more scary with the turning up of the Cold War.

stahtops 1y ago

Climate change is the source of negativity? In the 90s there was the hole in the ozone layer. Instead of acting like the slack jawed idiots in the current administration and basically saying “LOL FUCK YOU NERDS”, we banned CFCs. Nothing you listed actually helps most people. AI? Another way for untalented people to fake it and profit. Self Driving Car*. Waymo, everything else is trash. Mostly putting a human out of a job. Access to space? Great for academics and strategic defense. Maybe the common man will get some transport benefit out of it? Not yet. Autonomous drones? So we can kill each other better. Oh and the drone shows, definitely worth it. Flying cars? Ha. Hahaha. Ok. A trained pilot got crashed into while landing at an airport, this year. It’s not going to be a thing without being fully autonomous. But killing people probably makes more money.

cluckindan 1y ago
The ozone hole is still appearing annually, btw. https://ozonewatch.gsfc.nasa.gov/ https://ozonewatch.gsfc.nasa.gov/ Each year for the past few decades during the Southern Hemisphere spring, chemical reactions involving chlorine and bromine cause ozone in the southern polar region to be destroyed rapidly and severely. This depleted region is known as the “ozone hole”
- stahtops 1y ago
  https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/38685/the-ozone-layer-if-cfcs-hadnt-been-banned https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/38685/the-ozone-lay...
foxglacier 1y ago
You're talking pragmatically like someone who's not excited about the future. Of course you can find problems with any technology if you feel negative about it. These things aren't exciting because they clearly meet some need with no harmful side effects but because they leave a wide open future of unknown possibilities. Yes autonomy is how modern flying cars are expected to be controlled. That's one of the enabling technologies, that you could imagine (if you're excited about the future) leads to a Jetsons style streams of cars in the sky where it's too complex for humans to pilot them directly. > AI? Another way for untalented people to fake it and profit. You could also call it another way for untalented people to provide value to society. You want to gatekeep productive work to some elites who "deserve" to profit from it even if that means limiting the amount of good it can do to everyone. You want to stop the world getting better? Why? To protect "talented" people's rent-seeking?

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

bloomingeek 1y ago

The last century also brought us world wars and racism at all costs. The so called "great generation" (What a joke!), could very well have destroyed all of mankind. Then there's the "boomers". (my godforsaken generation) We have gone out of our way to politically ruin our nation, all for the sake of a lunatic, reality TV star who only cares about power and money. (A convicted felon was elected president?!?) Our vanity knows no bounds! Now you're praising technologies that won't help the poor or make most people's lives more meaningful because they will be monetized to the point of uselessness. Sheesh!

foxglacier 1y ago
> monetized to the point of uselessness If they become useless, they won't have a place in the market anymore. Do you really believe self-driving cars will never be useful because the companies controlling them will try to extract too much profit?
- bloomingeek 1y ago
  Yes, because poor people and others won't be able to afford the products. The more the underfunded people don't get to use the technology, the more it become useless.