9 ms·
Futuristic Predictions That Came True in 2012
- shanelja 14y agoI hadn't thought of these individual achievements as being that big until I saw them all together in one place and now I can say that this has truly been a breakthrough year all across the technology sector. Every year we seem to be accelerating our speed of development when it comes to technology, I'm only 19 and in my life I've seen us go from 56kb/s internet to 1gb/s internet, go from the rare NASA launch to regular private company launches (don't forget, SpaceX is not the only private company engaging in these kind of activities, there is also Virgin Galactic in the UK who are breaching the barriers facing them very quickly.) and medical breakthroughs across every sector. We live in the golden age of human history up to now and I would be willing to place a long bet that in 100 years, we will look back on the last 30 years as the dawn of the modern age.
- dhimes 14y agoI believe you are correct; the beauty of exponential growth is that at any point you can make the same observation about the previous 100 years.
- Retric 14y agoExponential growth in some areas. I don't think peoples lifestyles have changed all that much in the last 30 years. In 1982 you could point to computers, networks, and cellphones and say these are going to get far more popular. But, medicine, car millage, and battery power while improved are not that much better. PS: What's so striking to me is how little science fiction has changed over that time span.
- dhimes 14y agoAgree on sci-fi, but medical imaging has really been born in the last 30 years and may prove to be a game-changer in diagnosis and localized treatments over the next 70. Also, the invention of PCR techniques allow much better testing and drug development. So I think we'll look back 70 years from now and make the same claim about medicine.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- Retric 14y agoMRI's is another 'old' tech, and PCR is barely inside that 30 year window as it was developed in 1983. In 1952, Herman Carr produced a one-dimensional MRI image as reported in his Harvard PhD thesis. Meanwhile, Paul Lauterbur expanded on Carr's technique and developed a way to generate the first MRI images, in 2D and 3D, using gradients. In 1973, Lauterbur published the first nuclear magnetic resonance image.[25][26] and the first cross-sectional image of a living mouse was published in January 1974. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_resonance_imaging http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_resonance_imaging Granted, improve things enough and you end up with qualitative differences. AKA wind power is near parity with coal which is a game changer.
- dhimes 14y agoI don't disagree that the foundations of this technology were laid earlier than 30 years ago (NMR->MRI); there was, of course, even other medical imaging long before that (x-rays, PET, etc). I still think that in 70 years we're going to be able to look at this 30 year span and say it was 'game-changing.' And 100 years from today "we'll" (you maybe- I'd be 150 years old!) look at the years 2010-2040 at "game changing." Look at 1800-1830 from the point of view of 1900: steam engines. Anyway, it's fun to think about.
- dredmorbius 14y agoThere were long periods of world history where growth and development were anything but exponential, and for significant periods were reversed. The period since the Italian Renaissance has been pretty spiffy though.
- mtts 14y agoThe period since the Italian Renaissance is actually more interesting than "pretty spiffy". While science improved by leaps and bounds, living conditions for ordinary people (in Europe) deteriorated quite significantly. Crop yields plummeted, leading to starvation, disease and decreasing populations all over Europe. Only in the 19th century did things improve again. The moral of the story being, I guess, that improvements in science and technology, do not necessarily go hand in hand with improvements in living standards.
- dredmorbius 14y agoThe foundations for the 19th Century improvements were established in the 14th century, and followed nearly ten centuries of stagnation and decline. The payoff wasn't instantaneous, but it was certainly cumulative. Exponential, one might almost say.
- mtts 14y agoFor the technical improvements, maybe, but for the improvements in living standards, not so much. Living standards for commoners improved (vastly) during the 15th century, as a result of depopulation due to the Black Death in the 14th and the increased negotiating power of commoners that caused. Improved farming methods helped as well. Unfortunately these improved living standards led to overpopulation and a subsequent decrease in living standards that only bottomed out during the late 17th century and that was exacerbated further by constant religious war and by climate change (the "little ice age"). Recovery was slow (partly because the "little ice age" lasted until the early 19th century) and only towards the end of that century do we find peasants better off than their 15th century forebears. The evidence for this is in archives all over Europe and has been extensively written about by people like Emmanuel Le Roy Ladury. While the rich and educated were busy improving science and conquering the world, the poor suffered.
- pretoriusB 14y ago>We live in the golden age of human history up to now and I would be willing to place a long bet that in 100 years, we will look back on the last 30 years as the dawn of the modern age. Well, we live in the golden age of human _technology_. But, I'd argue, far from the golden age of human history. And maybe closer than ever to the extinction of mankind, if that "let's fix the climate issue with even more technology and continue on the same 'development for development's sake' path continues. Not to mention crazy politicians with nuclear, biological and what have you weapons on their hands and a battle for global resources like oil and water...
- JanezStupar 14y agoEnlighten me then, when was golden age of human history then in your opinion? I have a problem with you new age romantics, bitching about issues of current civilization without providing alternatives or even realizing what "reversing" current state of affairs would really mean.
- pretoriusB 14y ago>Enlighten me then, when was golden age of human history then in your opinion? Ever occurred to you that it might be in the future? Or that human history was perpetually in the same state of mess? Good for a few, a nightmare for others? Or that "good for humanity" and technological advancements are not necessarily the same thing, and that e.g living an agrarian life in some 18th century farm could be better for someone than living as an industrial worker in a highly modern Foxconn factory, despite increased odds of dying from a decease preventable today or having to get your water from the well? Damn, I'd take living in the sixties to living in the '00s any day of the week, despite having to let go of my iPad. >I have a problem with you new age romantics, bitching about issues of current civilization without providing alternatives or even realizing what "reversing" current state of affairs would really mean. When there's a problem, like a cancer, you need to remove the cancer. You don't need an "alternative" to it. Also, I'm not sure how to read the part about not realising what "reversing the current state of affairs would really mean". Who said anything about "reversing"? There's a lot we can do without reversing anything. Stoping the market craze is not the same as "reversing" progress or anything. Not to mention that progress != building more advanced things cheaper.
- shawn-butler 14y agoI think you should critically reevaluate your use of the word modern. We've already never been modern once before. Besides being a lot of fun, making up new words to describe historical trends both real and imagined can also be profitable.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- smegel 14y agoIn what way are virgin galactic in the UK?
- StavrosK 14y agoHow are they planning to do the FTL one?
- epimenov 14y agohttp://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4534359 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4534359
- eCa 14y agoI'd say that Great Plan for the Transformation of Nature[1] beats the crazy geoengineering businessman with its massive scale. This includes the draining of the Aral Sea, and was followed by attempts to refill it by diverting/reversing several rivers. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Plan_for_the_Transformation_of_Nature http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Plan_for_the_Transformati...
- AlexeiSadeski 14y agoHurricane Sandy was a Category 1 hurricane at landfall. That's pretty much the opposite of a SUPERSTORM. Much larger hurricanes have hit New England before. For example, the "Great New England Hurricane of 1938" made landfall on Long Island as a Category 3 storm, killing over 600 people. The Great Atlantic Hurricane of 1944 also was Category 3, killing 390 people. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_England_Hurricane_of_1938 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_England_Hurricane_of_1938 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Atlantic_Hurricane#Impact http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Atlantic_Hurricane#Impact Imagine if two Category 3 hurricanes impacted the North East within six years today. We'd never hear the end of how Global Warming was destroying the world. But since it happened in the early 20th Century, no one cares.
- keenerd 14y agoSandy was a big deal was because it landed in a highly overdeveloped area that should not have houses. Building your residence on a sandbar (or on a flood plane or below sea level or under an active volcano) is not exactly the brightest long term thinking. While global warming is going to make weather more unpredictable, hubris will always be the leading cause of damage.
- jlgreco 14y agoThat was the issue with Katrina. Building like that where such storms have traditionally been a century occurrence rather than a yearly occurrence is a far lesser error.
- mikeash 14y agoYou realize that hurricane category is only one measure of a storm, and not necessarily even the most important one? "Superstorm" Sandy is not called that because if its wind speed (which is all that "category" is about) but because of its size, as in physical extent.
- AlexeiSadeski 14y agoExcepting instances of extremely small storms, Category is in fact the second most important factor when determining the destructiveness of a storm. First most important is geography - where the storm hits. Size of the storm is the least important factor. A large but weak storm (such as Sandy) will always be less destructive than smaller but more intense storm - assuming that they make landfall at the same location. Sandy killed only 131 individuals, despite making landfall in an extremely densely populated area. Within the US, far smaller - but more intense - storms have killed far more people in areas far less densely populated.
- joshuahedlund 14y agoThe only one I would quibble with is the one that has nothing to do with technology. Sandy was the largest storm ever recorded in the Atlantic, but it was still not as large as the Pacific's Typhoon Tip in 1979. If three decades of accelerating climate change explains Sandy, it doesn't explain Tip, or why its record has yet to be broken.
- scoot 14y agoYes it does - it's about trends, not isolated occurrences (so in that sense I agree with your quibble, just not with your rationale). The frequency and intensity of extreme weather incidents is on an upward (and exponential) track.
- aidos 14y agoHonest question: Is there a good source for this information? Anecdotally it feels like weather is getting more extreme, I'd be very interested in seeing the numbers.
- scoot 14y agoIt's hard to get all the data in one place, but this article has links to good sources: http://ccap.org/extreme-weather-trends-climate-science-and-public-opinion/ http://ccap.org/extreme-weather-trends-climate-science-and-p...
- scoot 14y agoIt's difficult to find all the data in one place, but this article has links to good sources: http://ccap.org/extreme-weather-trends-climate-science-and-public-opinion/ http://ccap.org/extreme-weather-trends-climate-science-and-p...
- kjackson2012 14y agoNo, it's not. The Earth has always experienced devastating weather-related occurrences. There's nothing about it that suggests things are on a upward and exponential track.
- mddw 14y agoThe McDonalds affair was not a Cybernetic Hate Crime.
- kjackson2012 14y agoI really hope the one point about communicating with patients in a vegetative state is wrong. Not because it's not a groundbreaking discovery, but the implications are horrifying to me. Imagine all those patients who are left to just lie there their entire lives, and those that like Terri Schiavo that were allowed to starve to death. If they were actual aware of what was going on, that is the most horrifying fate I could imagine.
- pdelgallego 14y agoThat reminds me to the novel "Johnny got his gun". Highly recomended
- Ygg2 14y agoI don't see how discovering this was true or false has any bearing on the reality of it? Reminds me of that scientist that discovered that germs are cause of diseases and that doctors are spreading the germs with their bad hygiene. So doctors said "Well I know this theory isn't true, since I'm not responsible for all the manslaughter I'm committing according to this person. He is clearly insane.". And several decades later here we are.
- gregpilling 14y agoSo I notice that Elon Musk was involved with two of those - the Tesla and the Dragon space docking. Congratulations to him.
- tgb 14y agoI was really skeptical of this article, but turns out that this is actually a really interesting list. A lot of them are still up-in-the-air as far as end-results and I'd expect at least a couple of them to fall through in the end, but still a really neat collection.
- SideburnsOfDoom 14y agoThey missed out on the continuing merger of state mass-surveillance and corporate mass-surveillance. That's IMHO one of the biggest stories.
- josteink 14y agoRounded corners being worth 1 billion dollars in patent-lawsuits evidently not among them. Pantent-trolling being more profitable the producting neither. Seriously. We have come a so far in technology the last decades. Things we would consider science fiction or maybe even ipmossible ten years ago is every-day stuff now. And our "tech leaders" (and I say that with the most disrespect possible) are now busy engaging in frivilious lawsuit over the shape of the plastic which all this technology is packaged in instead of doing amazing stuff. People claim to "own" rounded corners and flat-screens. Designs already put to market in the 60s. In my books 2012 goes down as the year when tech stopped being about tech and became dominated by anti-competitive lawsuits instead of innovation. The year where no new tech arrived, only new lawsuits. And a sad year it was.
- slackson 14y agoI'd like to have hope that this is not a long-term trend, that these counterproductive lawsuits will soon awaken politicians to the need to reform patent and copyright law to a form that encourages innovation and creation. I'm not sure if this is an easy problem to solve, though, or if it requires deeper problems of corruption to be fixed first.
- meric 14y ago"tech" a hundred years ago was the beginnings of the aviation sector you see today. What you're seeing now is "tech" moving away from the _____ sector (the one HN belongs to) into to the _____ sector (the one with brain-machine interfaces as well as brain enhancing implants). So I agree with you, 2012 may well be the year the technology sector of 2011 is not the technology sector of 2012.
- petercooper 14y agoAre there any citations for the initial predictions? Or is this just a list of cool technology related things in 2012 that seem like someone might have predicted them? "The World's First Cybernetic Hate Crime Occurs at a McDonalds in France" seems awfully specific for a prediction.
- archangel_one 14y agoWell no, nobody predicted it would be specifically about an ocular implant at a McDonalds in France, but the concept of cybernetic hate crimes have been generally predicted by various sci-fi writers for some time; I, Robot, The Matrix (in the backstory in the Animatrix at least) and Deus Ex spring to mind as several examples.
- 31reasons 14y agoA very important breakthrough is missing in the list : Human Genome sequencing cost dropped to $1000 with processing time of only a day. Just 12 years ago it cost $3 billion dollars and 15 years of work.
- redwood 14y agoI thought we were still hovering above $1000 but getting close? Either way another important milestone of exponential gain is the cost of solar!
- pazimzadeh 14y agoAre you sure? 23andme.com apparently does it for $100.
- panic 14y ago23andMe doesn't fully sequence your genes. They just look for specific patterns.
- haberman 14y agoI think that's a misleading description. They do identify specific base pairs of your genotype (and you can download this data as a file), the difference is that they only identify a small subset of all base pairs, whereas sequencing identifies all of them. More info: http://blog.23andme.com/23andme-research/23andme-moves-into-the-world-of-sequencing/ http://blog.23andme.com/23andme-research/23andme-moves-into-...
- guscost 14y agoHysterical exploitation of the "first true superstorm" meme sticks out like a sore thumb. I stopped reading there, and will be reluctant to visit that site again.
- chrisringrose 14y agoReading about our positive technological advances makes me feel optimistic about our future. Go science!
- Deprogrammer9 14y agoHow could they forget this prediction of the smartphone by inventor & futurist Nikola Tesla? "When wireless is perfectly applied the whole earth will be converted into a huge brain, which in fact it is, all things being particles of a real and rhythmic whole. We shall be able to communicate with one another instantly, irrespective of distance. Not only this, but through television and telephony we shall see and hear one another as perfectly as though we were face to face, despite intervening distances of thousands of miles; and the instruments through which we shall be able to do his will be amazingly simple compared with our present telephone. A man will be able to carry one in his vest pocket." - Nikola Tesla 1926
- nate_martin 14y agoWhat about the Higgs Boson?
- monochromatic 14y ago> Cybernetic Hate Crime Are you fucking kidding me? That is not a thing. And if it were, the thing that happened at McDonald's would not qualify.
- stevoski 14y agoI agree with you. Once everything became clear, it seemed that the conflict was partly fuelled by the wearer of the "cybernetics" being belligerent. The "hate crime" was simply the wearer being asked to leave, and responding haughtily. Consequently both sides behaved immaturely, but not in "hate".