Future Predictions

[Nomadic]

On this point I will disagree, there has been speculation about the possibility of a worldwide communications network for well over 150 years (at least). Of course at the time the concept was envisioned as something more inline with a gigantic intercontinental system of telegraph lines but the idea itself was the same, nigh instantaneous communication between any two points on earth.

Their vision of the future was still limited by the technology of their day. The internet is vastly different than a Telegraph or even a telephone. We may have inklings of what is to come but the way it is implemented will be very different than what we imagine currently.

I don't see how this has anything to do with my comment that the concept for the internet existed long before the modern computer. Unless that was a response to stargate and you just accidentally quoted me instead of him (it happens, I've done it :P ).

[Ghostman]

Do you think the artists, the actors, the directors, the academics, the video game designers - heck, the tabletop roleplaying designers - will disappear once the uber-worker seizes control of the now-automated means of production?

My predicted scenario assumes that the artistically talented would be a solid part of the technocracy, and that in future mass-production can achieve the variety and the "earhtly" touch that we associate with hand-made products of less than masterpiece quality.

If we did have narrow, non self-aware AI and the superelite working class have dedicated their lives to becoming technocrats, they'd likely not be the most creatively inclined individuals.

They wouldn't be a distinct class by inheritance, merely by talent and education (and quite possibly genetic augmentation). If the selection process could be kept strictly meritocratic, the workers would comprise of the cream of the crop drawn from the general population at young age. (but I admit this is a potential weakness; the human tendencies of nepotism and corruption would be liable to cause problems if not countered somehow)

What about the people who make custom, artisan furniture, the racecar drivers, the dancers, the athletes, the singers, the priests, the social workers, the fashion designers, the organic farmers

I am very sceptical of the idea that there would be enough true demand for these types to provide employment for large masses of people. And it's not like they're unaffected by technological advancements either - consider real-time holographic broadcasts (or equivalent), and other such communications/entertainment technologies, virtual realities accessed through brain implants, etc.

- hell, what about the prostitutes?

Fembots? :-p

Isn't it possible that instead of becoming an unemployed parasitic mass existing only to consume at the beck and call of the technocracy humanity instead will simply orient itself away from labour and focus on different pursuits?  Sure we won't have soldiers and factory workers anymore, sure there won't be a lot of corporate middlemen, but unless the technocrats are brutal fascist dictators who outlaw art and education - which I doubt would ever happen, again, touch wood (!) - I think a good number of us might still have "careers," even if we aren't being paid per se.

Well, sure. You can dabble in artsy stuff as much as you like, but whether anyone's going to pay you a dime for it is another matter entirely. I am rather of the opinion that mankind in general is too lazy and too easily passivated to bother with grassroots creativity when there's a dirt-cheap and readily available flood of high-quality entertainment pouring out of every flat panel on your home and every little gadget you carry. There's always going to be geeks doing their geeky stuff at their own expense, but one should not assume that they're able to make a competitive business out of it.

In short, I think humanity at large, given half the opportunity, would gleefully decide to slouch down and consume.

[Elemental_Elf]

On this point I will disagree, there has been speculation about the possibility of a worldwide communications network for well over 150 years (at least). Of course at the time the concept was envisioned as something more inline with a gigantic intercontinental system of telegraph lines but the idea itself was the same, nigh instantaneous communication between any two points on earth.

Their vision of the future was still limited by the technology of their day. The internet is vastly different than a Telegraph or even a telephone. We may have inklings of what is to come but the way it is implemented will be very different than what we imagine currently.

I don't see how this has anything to do with my comment that the concept for the internet existed long before the modern computer. Unless that was a response to stargate and you just accidentally quoted me instead of him (it happens, I've done it :P ).

Sorry it was a weird connection relating several different ideas from 3 or 4 different posts :)

My point was that even though there was a concept of a global network 150 years ago, their vision of it was quite different than what truly came about (i.e. the Internet). Thus relating this to my original post where by people living today cannot truly fathom how the future will look (even if we can predict basic concepts). :)

[Steerpike]

[blockquote=Ghostman]In short, I think humanity at large, given half the opportunity, would gleefully decide to slouch down and consume. [/blockquote]You're probably right.  I guess my point is basically, in a more-or-less post-scarcity world where resources are abundant enough, life will be entirely what you make of it.  I was thinking less that people would dedicate themselevs to competetive artistic bussinesses and more that, given sufficient resources, more people would do creative things for wholly non-commercial reasons: if there's no reason to make money since life is already materially cushy, there's no reason for commerical competition.  Think really high budget youtube: that's my hope for the future.  The artists I know - and the creative people on this site, for that matter - don't make art for the money anyway, or at least, not primarily for the money.

[Nomadic]

On this point I will disagree, there has been speculation about the possibility of a worldwide communications network for well over 150 years (at least). Of course at the time the concept was envisioned as something more inline with a gigantic intercontinental system of telegraph lines but the idea itself was the same, nigh instantaneous communication between any two points on earth.

Their vision of the future was still limited by the technology of their day. The internet is vastly different than a Telegraph or even a telephone. We may have inklings of what is to come but the way it is implemented will be very different than what we imagine currently.

I don't see how this has anything to do with my comment that the concept for the internet existed long before the modern computer. Unless that was a response to stargate and you just accidentally quoted me instead of him (it happens, I've done it :P ).

Sorry it was a weird connection relating several different ideas from 3 or 4 different posts :)

My point was that even though there was a concept of a global network 150 years ago, their vision of it was quite different than what truly came about (i.e. the Internet). Thus relating this to my original post where by people living today cannot truly fathom how the future will look (even if we can predict basic concepts). :)

I can get behind that. I was mostly just pointing out that the idea for a global data network is far older than most people realized. I agree that if you took a person from today and threw him a hundred years into the future he'd probably flip out. Then again how much more or less he would do said flipping vs a person from 1910 being transported to today is anyone's guess. It depends on how technology and culture changes and how fast it does.

For example a person from 1910 would be amazed by the typical television or computer, they'd stare in awe at a rocket sitting on its launch pad, and be fascinated by cell phones. Yet for all the changes there are many points that they could draw connections to that would rationalize things (and avert horrible san damage). The modern automobile is far more advanced than its ancestors but still follows the same basic principle, modern guns are largely similar to their 1900s cousins (some of those cousins are still in production and largely the same). Cell phones are fascinating in their own right but a connection could be drawn between them and the early radio broadcasts of his time. The point being that for all our changes over the last hundred years a person from a hundred years ago would see many of our devices not as strange arcane artifacts but as the obvious results of decades of improvement upon ideas and items from their own time. I feel it would be the same for you or I if we were placed in the year 2110. So in a way we can fathom what possible things might be invented in a hundred years. As for political shifts, good luck with that. We can't reliably tell what the political landscape will look like a year from now let alone a hundred.