The world is going through constant changes, some better than others, some worse than others. The fact remains – the world will not look like it does now in fifty years.
I attended a seminar today about how the world might look in fifty years (pros, cons, hopes, fears) based on three different perspectives; liberal, structuralists & realist.
We did this based on how we, considering each and every perspective, think how the world will look.For example, liberalists thought that with continuation of the free markets and world trade the world will be a much better place environmentally since it’ll allow green entrepreneurs to establish themselves more easily, whereas a structuralist argues that the world would be in complete chaos because the free trade and global market systems would not let states invest enough in green technology because people don’t want environmental friendly choices – they want cheap choices and the cheapest is the least environmental friendly.We then further on discussed how we thought how we wanted the world to look in fifty years and we had a super-insightful discussion so I just wanted to bring that topic over here…
How would you like the world to be in 2060?
Please consider the role (relative importance) of the state, the role and structure (form of governance) of international organisations, how you think that trade and production should be organized as well as how geopolitics and conflicts will be managed when you formulate your reply.
Please, feel free to drift away with your thoughts, as it’s solely speculations and wishes it could extend from protectionism and closed societies to one global state to multinational corporations or a global environmental congress etc.
As long as you can somewhat argue for your viewpoint you can say whatever you want!
I can't help but look at the future from a realist point of view. By 2060, water shortages in many countries will probably start to happen (I've heard as early 2050) which will inevitably cause wars. Sure countries may help each other out at first but that will probably stop once the problem worsens. The problems with wars over water will be that it won't be as easy to characterize the "enemies" as bad guys because they will be doing what is necessary to survive which could create a situation where you have to fight the opposing people but at the same time you don't really want to because you would be aware of their desperate situation (I can't see it not becoming common knowledge why nations go to war in the future with the constantly evolving rate at which we receive information), and who knows what this does to the psyche of a soldier.
The world's population will probably be near an unmanageable state by this time especially in places like Africa, China, and India. This, of course, will create numerous problems like what to do about the growing population? (a problem we actually have now) Where will people live? Will there be enough food? (most likely not) And there will probably be problems we can't even imagine that will plague most countries.
I don't think it's a completely bleak situation though. I see 2060 as having fantastic technology. I imagine oil becoming nearly completely outdated and most people using other sources of fuel (most likely solar, wind, etc.) Stuff like TVs and computers will probably be controlled through the mind (they already have some basic forms of this recently). And I'm sure a whole host of things I can't imagine.
The average life span will increase dramatically in my opinion. Living 100-150 years (maybe more if things work out the way more optimistic scientists hope) will be commonplace (which, while cool, only adds on to the population crisis). Diseases like most types of cancers and various other deadly afflictions will be all but eradicated though new one, probably just as lethal if not more, will show up.
And who knows what the political scene will look like...I'm excited for it.
So in a nut shell, like every other time in the history of everything, 2060 will have it's good points, stuff that makes you say "this is the best time in history to live", but it will also be plagued with it's own horrors like today.
To be honest I am mildly skeptic about the water supply issue. For one thing, 60 years from now we will have significantly superior technology. It is a huge issue right now that fresh water sources are being drained as irresponsibly as they are however however if water does indeed run out we will adapt and develop the technology to deal with the situation. Once freashwater sources are drained we will take the second best only alternative which is saltwater. Right now purifying saltwater is expensive however if we are forced and with the proper investment and technology it is perfectly viable as a water source in the long run. New processes and future nanotechnology would do the trick IMO. More importantly, there already are plants around the world which purify saltwater for human consumption.
I do believe aging population will be one of the greatest challenges in the later half of this century. I do believe nations will fall and rise due to that. I agree in that people will overall live up to at least 120 and perhaps even 150 (specially once stem cell research and biotechnology allow for actual organ replacement lol) which naturally will have a huge tool on the economy. Nowadays people retire when they are 65 or so. If people's life expectancy increases that much we would be under the scenario that people will retire when they have lived just half their live or less. In that regard in the future if you retire at 65 then you will essentially be supported for the half which remains in your life which is a huge tool on the economy to say the least. I think we have to face the very real possibility that by the time our generation reaches their 60s the world might have changed enough so that retiring age is changed to 80 or 85. If we really do get to live up to 150 then perhaps retiring age would even be changed to over 120 and even then it would be a good 20 or 30 years of being supported by the state at that point.
As for actual energy sources I think we will see two things for the most part. The first is solar energy. I used to be extremely skeptic about it however at the moment I have been lead to believe progress in nanotechnology has been made to the point where it could be viable and meet our requirements. Currently, there is nothing green about it (making solar panels causes a significant amount of polution, too much to be green and it is hardly efficient). The second thing we will rely on in the future is nuclear energy, perhaps even more than solar energy. Overall nuclear energy is clean (no greenhouse gases and barely any thermal contamination) and extremely efficient and as long as appropriate security measures (which even today exist, what happened in japan was in turn an example of gross negligence and a massive failure to use common sense, it was by no means karma's retribution or something of the sort).
Sometimes I wonder if in the future everything will go into flames and war and that time my parents and I are living in will be the only peaceful time. The horrors might get worse than it is today tho..as developed as our technology is there is no doubt that there are risks.
and yeah, the aging population thing..over here it is worse. We don't have enough kids.
We've seen all kind of sci-fi films but I'm sure it will not be that way.
Natural resources are depleting and solar/wind energy can't really be compared to oil.
It's hard to imagine a brighter future..but that's what is always being said anyway.
^Dunno, sci fi in general has shown to be onto stuff when it comes to what will happen. After all, in many ways sci fi does kinda reflect what we expect from the future and what we want to build towards (not everything but a lot of things). Take a look at ipads, cell phones, laptop, video conference.... 15 years ago those were not common at all (ot even nonexistent) and 30 years ago those were the kinda things you would only see in sci fi. Obviously an sci fi utopia is very unlikely to say the least but there are plenty of things in sci fi which even now are believed to be theoretically possible (much like cells phones in the 60s lol). Worm holes are known to be theoretically possible for example. Natural resources are deplenting but I have my doubts about us being screwed. I have read a number of articles regarding green energy resources being relatively close to being competitive with oil for example. In particular, nanotechnology seems to have made a few contributions to solar energy panels which made them significantly more efficient. It really would not be that strange that 10 years from now solar panels are competitive with oil cost wise(take that third world country demagogs). Of course that would not quite solve the chemical contamination issue however the difference IMO would be that chemical contamination is something that could be controlled if the processes regarding making and disposing of solar panels are properly controlled whereas greenhouse gas emission is not possible to control (except by using less coal or oil). Lets face, science fiction has to come up with new stuff because half the cool stuff they have is already available to us (instant long distance communication, touchscreens, videoconference and the ideal of teleporting is 80 years old). The only thing which sci fi has over us for the most part are weapons (which would hardly be practical in every day life), space travel (similarly old concept) and aliens. For fuck sake, even fully functional flying cars exist nowadays (the wonders of you tube lol).
Well, the technology will be there even if third world countries do not develop it on their own. It is a matter of them acquiring it which could be done either by multinational companies interested in investing or by the governments. I would doubt the technology for such a thing will be impossible to acquire by purchasing it unless they willingly make it so. I would also argue a war for water is too expensive (even the benefits of an oil war are questionable honestly and true progress has been made in alternative energy sources recently) and it would be plainly easier and cheaper to by the equipment (its just different places to put a few billion dollars into). Its not like we are going to run out of water from one day to the other either, we should be able to know when the deadline approaches with proper studies.
India, Pakistan and North Korea are rattling nuclear sabres. Jetliners fly into skyscrapers laden with kerosene and human bodies. Terrorists strike around the world. And then there are concerns about the degradation of our environment and fears of a coming eco-apocalypse.
And it seems tropical forests will suffer dearly. This means that countries in Africa and South America will experience a change in climate.
Anyways, wasn't it Isaac Newton who predicted the world will end in 2060? Is this the reason why the year 2060 is based for this thread?
Here is a quote I remember hearing my professor saying when lecturing about the apocalypse and differences of fringe science.
From my notes
Although Newton had plausible reasons for his beliefs, he used religious information for his research. Plus, I think Newton put too much emphasis on religion rather than reasoning. I mean, the way he approached the date of 2060 makes no sense to me whatsoever. The world will not end so quickly.
I think the world in the 2060s era would be more like a new beginning. It will be the end of an old age, and the beginning of a new era.
And era were technology will be Earth's miracle for survival. I also predict that children of 13 and over would be an accepted norm to watch adult or pornographic material. I read an article about Neurotechnology and Society (2010–2060).
The only thing I can be 100% sure of is that I will "LIVE to SEE" the day of the year 2060. I would be a 68-69 year old woman. I guess my beauty will die out by then. *sigh* Better enjoy my youth while it lasts!!!! (but then, some kind of age repellent may probably be invented by then)
---------- Post added at 01:12 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:37 PM ----------
No my mad, I'd be 70-79 years of age ...I am really distracted to be calculating anything at this time.
I'll be back.
Last edited by Asahina; November 24, 2011 at 12:42 PM.
Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex (season 1), and
Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex 2nd Gig (season 2)
Is this concise enough?, HK isn't verbose for once, hehe
(watch this anime series, 2 seasons, if you haven't yet, hehe)
Much of what is in this anime series is happening, has happened, or looks like it will probably happen, except there's some inconsistences too.
The Anime compared to our real world:
1. Man-Machine interface and a cybernetic world should soon be occuring in our world, as shown in the anime
2. The economic mess of Europe and the U.S. has started already to bring ruin upon the U.S., as shown in the anime
3. The Drug Cartel chaos in Mexico is happening in our world, as shown in the anime.
4. (#2 + #3) This probably would lead to the U.S. invading Mexico, as seen in the anime
5. A nuclear war (WWIII) looks like its coming soon, as shown as flashbacks in the anime
6. Japan has still not created the "Nuclear Scrubbers" yet, which had happened in the anime
Or... one of the Multi-National Corporations, becomes a world controlling organization, a corporation that is more powerful than all of the governments of the world combined... becoming...
THE UMBRELLA CORPORATION (Resident Evil gaming and movie series)
Or, we're simply living on a space colony (be in outer space, like: Deep Space Nina, a Star Trek tv series), and either, with or without, habitability on the Earth, depending on how well we improve our (own behaviorial) treatment of it or not.
2060, is ~50 year away from now
with the exponentially increasing rate of our science, our future in 2060 could very well be unrecognizably more advanced then we're capable of imagining it to be.
there's been an explosion of new technology from 2000 to 2010
now compare that with from 1990 to 2000, there's not comparison.
and it gets worse, going further back: from 1980 to 1990, 1970-1980, and etc...
due to technology, our society has been changing faster as well.
it used to be ~10 years for society to change (the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, 00s, and 10s), and now it might soon drop to only every ~5 years.
Our way of life through technology, might even get to a point where it is literally changing way too fast for us..,
which would be a very fascinating phenominon, that I haven't ever seen anyone adress about this, at least I'm not aware of this being considered by any one and its implications, disasterous implications...
Last edited by HegemonKhan; November 27, 2011 at 01:46 AM.
Hopefully social justice will fare better by 2060, and there will be less discrimination based on -isms and -phobias. For example we're making progress concerning LGBT* issues, but it's still not enough.
I am a little curious of how we will deal with the whole education thing. As time passes every career becomes increasinly technical and you need more knowledge to be able to do jobs. Right now a master's degree is basically a necessity to be worth a damn in the job market which was not the case 10, let alone 20 or 30 years ago. Obviously knowledge takes time to acquire and it is getting increasingly expensive. Seriously, odds are that 20 years from now someone without a phd of some form will be regarded as someone with merely a bachelor's degree today or less... In other words, we will need either more time to spend studying (which parents would perhaps not enjoy) or find ways to make studying more efficient. Honestly, 4-6 years to getting a bachelors degree (depending on the careers and how many classes you take), 2 years for a masters and 2 years for a phd... add in experience requirements and completing your education takes a wooping 15 to 20 years after finishing high school. Thats a lot of time and a lot of money. Of course, if we get people living up to 150 it is not so bad but still, in the future you would not really be able to finish your education until you are 35 in general. I see two possible solutions to the issue so far. Either they start genetically modifying babies to make them significantly smarter from the get go thus reducing the long term time it takes to learn stuff or they invent a machine which pumps knowledge straight into your brain. Imaging the world if we did not have to study, we just have to get an encyclopedia pumped into our brains on a daily basis. Anyways, at some point at least culture will have to change so as to adapt to new educational requirements to say the least.
Downloading (or is it uploading?, meh) knowledge/data into our brains would be very nice, hehe (Matrix and/or GitS:SAC)
or as you said, we could always go the chem and/or genetic routes, presumably being able to find-create a "smart pill or smart-einstein babies", like in the pretty recent movie... that I can't remember the name to... argh.... Limitless, maybe?
or, we could simply have our machines do everything for us... and we just do hedonistic/recreational/pleasurable stuff all the time type of utopia.
Star Trek never does (I don't think anyways) explains how their kids are able to be studying quantum mechanics and like advanced stuff, enabling them as adults to function in the uber technical world of Star Trek and its Federation.
Last edited by HegemonKhan; November 27, 2011 at 06:24 PM.
Well, we would need machines smarter than ourselves in order to be able to allow us to quite literally do nothing though. We are quite far away from that though...
Another thing which I do believe will have an impact that is traveling will become even faster. 30 years ago it took twice as long to get from US to europe by plane for example. I would think that by 2060 traveling will be fast enough for people to go around the world in a few hours at most. Heck, a this point there would be no time constraint for someone from the US to go to europe to have lunch and return in the same day (it would likely be expensive as hell though). What would perhaps be somewhat more viable is to be able to travel farther just for a weekend (if you have the money) or something of the sort. Right now you wouldn't go very far under the assumption that you are going to spend 8 hours in a plane but if the assumption was that you could do the distance in a couple of hours then it would be worth considering. I guess it also depends on whether traveling actually becomes cheaper in the future. At least there seems to be plenty of oil left to last us until 2060 lol. I do believe that in the future there will be viable alternative energy sources.
Last edited by Miyagi; July 29, 2012 at 10:38 AM.
that's possible now... by going into outerspace, there's less/no friction, and so by going up into outerspace from (for ex.) the U.S. and then coming back down to earth in (for ex.) Europe, would actually be faster than traveling from a earth-bound (through the air) plane.
it's 8 hrs across the Atlantic Ocean through the air, right?
well by going into outerspace, the same flight would take like I forgot what they said... like maybe 30 minutes, perhaps.
though for 2060, we'd better have teleporters.... hehe
Teleporters ("Mini or Personnel wormholes") are our answer-solution to transportation's problems, hehe
(though they might present a different problem... right location... wrong time... laughs)
Last edited by HegemonKhan; November 28, 2011 at 06:07 PM.
A wormhole would not technically be a teleporter. A teleporter would disaseemble you at the molecular level and assemble you elsewhere perfectly. A wormwhole is a rift in space or something of the sort. Somehow I can't imagine the homemade version of that. How much energy would you need to open a rift in space elsewhere? Would we all have our own nuclear reactors next to the laundry machine? A wormhole would work with volume so perhaps they would be a viable replacement for public transportation a few hundred years from now lol.
As for planes going to space, Its not what I had in mind but it would be interesting. No friction is good but just how high would you have to go for such a thing? At least 85 kms which would be a decent distance before you get the benefit of no friction and getting up there would take some time. Even then, at the regular altitude they already enjoy the benefit of little to no friction don't they? What I had in mind was actually faster planes which is what has been going on over the past few decades. On another note through the magic of google I found an article about the japanese developing a new plane which travels faster than sound which should work commercially(and we havent had those since the concorde).