What is Digg?67 Comments
- koughen, on 08/25/2008, -0/+15I think I have seen all of these movies.
- nypix, on 08/26/2008, -0/+146.Lovebots.
- erichw1504, on 08/26/2008, -0/+1311. Portal Guns
- inactive, on 08/26/2008, -0/+9most of that sounds like a nightmare, and the naive way this guy explains them only does more to scare me into thinking we could head that way when people dont even realize the danger
also howd this get frontpage so soon? - TnTBass, on 08/26/2008, -0/+9Interesting read. Reminds me of those old 1920's articles describing how the year 2000 will be like. Not accurate by any means, but entertaining anyway.
- serif69, on 08/26/2008, -0/+8"This will become necessary due to the clamour of refugees trying to get to the highly developed regions of central Asia and Africa from their economically backward homes in North America and Europe. Many of these will be brought over by formally American and European corporations, which will relocate to the centre of their major markets in India, the Congo and China."
Uh huh. - LeRenard, on 08/26/2008, -0/+8The author seems incredibly naive about even basic human nature. For instance, they make the assumption that humans have an innate drive to be nomadic, and we are merely existing the way we do in communities and fixed locations due to a need for resources. From there, they speculate that an abundance of resources would cause us to once again return to nomadism. This completely discounts the possibility that nomadism was merely a vehicle for obtaining resources, and that once we were able to meet our needs reliably, we were able to indulge a fundamental desire to create permanent homes.The author also assumes cyborgs are inevitable (as do many sci-fi authors) but completely disregard that a large portion, possibly the majority of human beings are uncomfortable and squeamish with even mildly intrusive and non-destructive technology such as hypodermic needles. I'm also not sure on what basis they formulated their "human grid" idea, as it seems they've never heard of group-think, and I'm uncertain what possible connection celebrity could hold with calculation. If anything, the zeitgeist has shown to be rather unpredictable and lacking in "common sense".
- TheNeptune, on 08/26/2008, -0/+7The algorithm for getting to frontpage accounts for less popular topics. So while really popular topics in tech news, election politics, etc requires a higher amount of diggs to make front page, apparently General Sciences requires less. The concept is to keep the front page a bit more diverse than all tech and politics, admittedly though I sense it's failing slightly and may need some adaptation to the digg handicap for less popular subjects.
- boudey, on 08/26/2008, -2/+9OK, who was expecting a Cracked article?
- M724, on 08/26/2008, -0/+7The thing that scares me most is the "Holoselves" entry. You'll never be sure who you're really talking to, and I believe we will see a new kind of identity crisis from people who use multiple holoselves.
- YawehsDead, on 08/26/2008, -0/+5We already have something like that. When you talk to someone online, you never really know who they are.
- MagMan68Classic, on 08/26/2008, -0/+5Hoverboards, Power Laces and self drying jackets
- Smurph0404, on 08/26/2008, -0/+4This is mostly commie pipe dream bull. It is essentially saying that one day technology will be so awesome that it will totally alter human nature and we will turn into perfect little citizens in a utopia where we live off the land and have no possessions and do whatever we want. Because, you know, technology will do all the hard stuff. We're probably just as likely to blow our selves up in a nuclear war or kill ourselves by killing the planet or turn ourselves into unrecognizable zombie creatures or, most likely, expand the individualist capitalist society that is clearly dominating the world today until we are able to move to other planets and get more resources to preserve our way of life.
- inactive, on 08/26/2008, -0/+4Some of that definitely does scare me, if only for some societal and ethical implications...but the idea of Global (Non-)Governmnet intrigues me as it seems to be a somewhat libertarian (or maybe anarcho-communist...?) way of governance.
I know that sounds confusing, but anything that takes the decision making process out of the hands of government and corporations and puts it back into the hands of the people those decisions directly affect is all good by me. Personal responsibility is a GOOD thing. - andy2125, on 08/26/2008, -1/+5Really, it wasn't that long of an article. They could have at least proof read it.
#4..."At a certain point in time, sooner than we thing," - DragoonWraith, on 08/26/2008, -0/+4Hah, that's where I stopped reading.
I mean, not that it's out of the question, the global balance of power is always shifting and Africa and South America are perhaps past-due for their time of dominance, but the sort of casual, forgone conclusion way he says it is just irritating. - calipan, on 08/26/2008, -0/+4Why I find funny is that what scares you about these technologies I find intriguing and I excitedly anticipate them all.
- darrenprog, on 08/26/2008, -0/+4I think some people will fit in just perfectly.
- dse78759, on 08/26/2008, -0/+311. Fem-Bots.
- gametavern, on 08/26/2008, -0/+3Extended reality for sure. I mean, 3d rendered worlds are already out there with ads being sold, shops being setup and relationships being made. Half of WoW players never leave their houses.
- smurfsahoy, on 08/26/2008, -0/+3Sorry, tried to edit the above post, but took too long. Full version:
Only two of these are relevant:
1) Extended Reality
2) Global Intelligence
#1 means that everybody will basically be instantaneously happy and fulfilled, and war/famine/etc. will pretty much just melt away. if you can just conjure up and then actually live any life you want, then there's no reason to ever worry about anything again. There aren't even limits on land ownership or power or things that previously could not possibly be infinitely plentiful - because you can just experience your own world domination without hurting anybody else. And especially if you grow up like this, you would never want for the "real thing" instead.
#2 is for one, very likely to be the means by which #1 occurs, but also after extended reality is established, a global intelligence can run around behind us, tucking in all the corners, dotting the is, crossing the t's - extending lifespans, preventing meteor strikes, repairing the environment, ensuring uninterrupted food and electricity, etc. A true global intelligence could solve all of these problems as an afterthought, in probably under a year or two, since an electronic mind can run thousands of times faster than a biological one. And then it goes off and does whatever it wants to do philosophically/mathematically, etc. and probably just leaves us alone, or maybe takes a passing interest out of curiosity. (A super intelligent AI would have no reason to ever harm humanity. It has nothing to gain - it's already super intelligent and requires no real resources from us... for a short time, we would provide some entertaining science and engineering challenges for it, and we later provide entertaining stories, that's all.) - YawehsDead, on 08/26/2008, -0/+3What about taking number two a step further? If we will ever be able connect to machines in a cyborg fashion, won't we also be able to connect our brains to this super-intelligence? In effect, melding our minds with the super-intelligence into one. We can become that super-intelligence, it doesn't have to be a separate entity. Similar to what cloud computing is to the individual computer.
- UnstableMind, on 08/26/2008, -0/+3I think the important thing here is, we may be able to run Crysis one day...
- Pegritz, on 08/26/2008, -0/+2Just read Vernor Vinge's Rainbows End for a somewhat more accurate depiction of the world only a decade or two in the future.
- shipwreck58, on 08/26/2008, -0/+2This is pure utopian *****, and human beings by their very nature cannot accept it.
- toff72, on 08/26/2008, -0/+2... soon will be making another run
- TheNeptune, on 08/26/2008, -3/+5It's a blog passing as a "magazine". It's an intelligent piece and was clearly spell-checked, but I don't think they have quite the editing staff to catch small things like that.
A bit nitpicky of you, honestly. - JWin, on 08/26/2008, -0/+2#3. Extended Reality
Ever seen the movie eXistenZ? Break out the pods! - smurfsahoy, on 08/26/2008, -0/+2Only two of these are relevant:
1) Extended Reality
2) Global Intelligence - awills, on 08/26/2008, -0/+2I'm glad someone else has some common sense. This article was just naive *****, especially the part about wealth being equally distributed and the end of exploitation. Please.
That said though, I do think at least some people will become cyborgs. I would for sure. - smurfsahoy, on 08/26/2008, -0/+1Yes, Yawes, which is precisely why the power is put in the hands of every citizen/worker equally. So that nobody really has much of it and it won't corrupt anyone.
Once production levels and efficiency are high enough and/or there is a global AI, that will easily be possible without significant government inefficiencies, wars, etc. - Nickbc87, on 08/26/2008, -0/+111. Multireal
- MagMan68Classic, on 08/27/2008, -0/+1shoes with self-tying velcro. Its going to be sweet
- Scaryclouds, on 08/27/2008, -0/+1@Jowitz
Whoa. Epic story. - inactive, on 08/26/2008, -0/+1sorry. wrong. This article is assuming everyone becomes peace-loving hippie douchebags. Remember we are only a quarter of a million years away from wiping out the neanderthal. Our primitive mammalian brains will engage in warfare for a long-ass time to come, especially with many leaders grinding our lives underfoot with no end in sight.
A much more believable future is one where humans are downtrodden. A far-off look at the planet in completely unpredictable, as there are far too many variables to accurately assume levels of technology will continue to rise (see: nuclear weapons, george w. bush).
Cyborgs? Are you serious? Humans will eventually integrate themselves into software, that is ineviable. But saying the human psyche will be more comfortable in a humanoid form is to say the human psyche is incapable of adaptation and uwanting any change. The minds that seek drugs for alternate perspectives and other realms of thought will definitely accept a hard disk on a database, somewhere in China. :)
And even that is assuming we can continue to increase technological expertise; the governments of tomorrow will continue to let information trickle down to consumers at a slow pace, just as today.
With quantum computers just on the horizon, this changes things quite a bit. Computing will change considerably, but going further:
What about the creation of inevitable AI and its impact on religion?
What do we face in future wars and warfare?
When will we contact other sentient beings that can actually communcate with us?
What if we uncover a current government's secrets?
The future cannot be answered by answers, but questions instead. - YawehsDead, on 08/26/2008, -0/+1Power corrupts though.
- smurfsahoy, on 08/26/2008, -1/+2No, that's pretty much just straight up Marxist Communism.
-Nobody owns productive capital
-Even and plentiful distribution of resources
-No need for nations or military (police, perhaps)
-Most likely pure Democratic decision making
-Futuristic technology making it all psosible
All essentially right from the old guy's mouth. - FrostedFlame, on 08/26/2008, -0/+1You mean this isn't a Cracked article?
- Iztikeit, on 08/27/2008, -0/+1Neuromancer is great science fiction. Its a shame legitimate science fiction seems like a dead genre.
- UnstableMind, on 08/26/2008, -0/+1I took the global intelligence thing as everyone will be educated, not a massive 42 computer.
- WebWorker, on 08/27/2008, -0/+1It's hard to take someone seriously when they rely on a spellchecker to be their only proofreading.
- Jowitz, on 08/26/2008, -0/+1You should read Isaac Asimov's The Last Question, it is not only one of the best short stories I have read, but applies heavily to this idea. The full text is available at http://www.multivax.com/last_question.html
- GreatSunJester, on 08/26/2008, -0/+1heheh... he said "extended" .. hehe.. hehe..
Sorry, I recently got stuck watching late night TV... All I could think of was Smilin' Bob hawking a new pill to "Extend your reality".......
Yah yah.. I am not stable! - speed153, on 08/26/2008, -0/+1DON'T DATE ROBOTS!
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7714940296 ... - smurfsahoy, on 08/26/2008, -0/+1Would you want to be part of a big mind? Giving up one's individuality is sort of a big deal, which I'm guessing few people would be interested in.
Without melding into one, you could still upgrade all of your mental capacities with hardware/software (invented by global intelligence), and you could have access to amazing libraries, of course, and data input from probes all over space and Earth. (If you really wanted to see the "real" world more than created worlds) That's not really all that different from what you're talking about, minus the creepy loss of power and individuality. I suppose it couldn't hurt to have as an option, though.
You're also assuming, by the way, that a super intelligent AI would WANT human minds joining in with it. It might not for some reason. - FrostedFlame, on 08/26/2008, -0/+1Bullsh*t.
- Scaryclouds, on 08/27/2008, -0/+1Also why would some of the most resource rich areas, North America and Europe, become backwaters of the world? Sorry but it's going to be a long time and many changes of power before the Western world becomes "backwards."
That is not to say the Asian powers couldn't become equal powers to the westerns powers in the mean time. - Scaryclouds, on 08/27/2008, -0/+1I can't wait till double ties because the style!
- Krazeel, on 09/05/2008, -0/+1Self-cooking popcorn
- MagMan68Classic, on 08/27/2008, -0/+1"I wish I go back to the beginning of the season and put some money on the Cubbies!"
-
Show 51 - 67 of 67 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is