« The Education of Henry Adams | Main | Observed »

17 April 2005 — In the Year 2025 (22)

No, I'm serious: I really am curious about your predictions for the future. I want to know how you think our world is going to change in the next twenty years, in ways both large and small. In particular, how will our daily lives change?

To put this in perspective: twenty years ago, there was no global internet. There were no cell phones. The first laptop computers had just been introduced. The most powerful personal computer available was less powerful than your current cell phone. Compact discs had been developed, but were still several years from mass production; vinyl records were still the dominant form of musical distribution. Cordless telephones were novel, as were answering machines, and microwave ovens. VCRs were becoming ubiquitous. If you wanted to know a piece of information, you went to the library to find the answer in a book. The Soviet Union and nuclear war seemed like very real threats.

These are just a few of the things that occur to me immediately. There are many other changes that have occurred in the past two decades, changes that sometimes make me feel as if I live in a science-fictional world.

Where will we be in twenty years? I want to hear your predictions. Here are some of mine:

1. There will be blanket wireless internet coverage in every major metropolitan area in the next ten years, possibly within the next five years. Most of this access will be fee-based, but a substantial portion will be shared freely by those who can afford to shoulder the cost.

2. The miniaturization of telephones will continue. Already we see over-the-ear attachments for cell phones. These will gradually become the cell phones themselves, so that everything is contained in the over-the-ear device. (I expect these devices to be de rigeur in five years.)

3. How will these devices operate without a display or a keypad? Voice activation. With its iPod shuffle, Apple has demonstrated that its possible to produce devices that don't possess qualities we expect (in this case, a display for an mp3 player). Voice recognition technology will become more prominent in our daily lives. Remember how the crew of the starship Enterprise always talk to the computer? We're going to start moving that direction. (Think OnStar.)

4. The conflict between transnational corporations and average consumers will reach some sort of crisis. One of the insights I gleaned from reading Henry Adams is that some sort of financial crisis in the 1890s (Adams isn't perfectly clear on the cause) allowed a paradigm shift in this country, taking power from the individual and granting it to the corporations, suddenly creating a dichotomy between industry and the worker. (I'd love to do more reading about this.) This conflict has only intensified over time, and corporations have only grown in strength and arrogance until they've reach their current might. Something has to change, and I think it's going to happen in the next twenty years.

5. A breakthrough in biomedical research — or a series of small advances — will create the beginning of the longevity industry. Human lifespans will increase, particularly among the wealthy who can afford these gerontological treatments. The advances will be small at first, but increase with time. (The societal implications of these increased life spans will be huge.)

I know, I know: these are sort of pansy predictions. Fine. I'll break out the big gun. I mentioned this at book group, but the idea was mostly pooh-poohed, but I think this is really going to happen, and sooner rather than later:

In the next twenty years, human implants are going to become popular, controversial, and commonly used. (Religious groups and civil liberties groups will have fits, of course.)

What kind of implants? Parents will have small chips implanted in their children so that they can be tracked via satellite.

Remember the over-the-ear cell phones I mentioned earlier? Forget those. You'll be able to purchase an implant that allows for cellular communication.

Like your debit card? Great! It'll be common to have a small chip implanted in your hand, a chip containing all of your financial information. When you go to the grocery store, you won't swipe a card and then enter a PIN; you'll simply press your thumb to a pad and the transaction will be processed. Or maybe you won't need to have any sort of check-out line at all. You'll simply go to the store, pick up what you need, and when you walk out special scanners in the doorway will pick up the information for your implant and from the various microchips in the packaging of the products you've purchased. The transaction will be processed automatically.

There will be implants containing medical information, allowing hospitals instant access to patient histories.

Think this sounds like science fiction? It's not. The technology already exists. Companies are merely searching for methods to make it palatable. They needn't worry; the American drive for convenience is going to lead to mass acceptance of these implants in the next twenty years. Only two things stand in the way: marketing and miniaturization. Once the implants have been reduced from 4mm square each to a single 4mm square for all the necessary functions, they'll be more appealing. But the single biggest way to encourage mass adoption of the implants is to create an intensive prolonged marketing campaign touting their advantages.

It's going to happen.

And these implants are only just the beginning. I believe the twenty-first century is going to see an explosion of cybernetic technology. We're not likely to see bionic men and women with super-powered mechanical arms, but I wouldn't be surprised if, in the next twenty years, specific cybernetic enhancements become popular.

Not only will you be able to pay to have an implant to enhance your hearing, your cell phone will go from being an over-the-ear device to an in-the-ear cochlear implant.

Eventually, the implants will tap into the power of the brain itself. There'll be implants that actually access the brain's memory to store information. Imagine a brain implant that, in its firmware, stores a score of different pieces of software, from an address book to a music player. Imagine that the implant only contained the software, but that the data was stored in your brain, like an actual memory. But instead of you having to remember the information, the implant does the work for you. When it stores the number of the business contact you just met, the implant's database remembers to which part of the brain it provided stimulus. When you want to retrieve the information, it provides stimulus to the same region.

Here's the exciting part. Remember my first prediction? The blanket coverage of wireless internet access in major metropolitan areas? Imagine how that could be utilized by a cybernetic implant in your brain. You could have instant access to any piece of information available on the internet. The implant could stimulate your visual cortex, letting you actually see your Google Map or your e-mail or your XXX porn.

Yes, I really do think this stuff is coming, and sooner than you think. I say it'll be here in twenty years, but there's a very real possibility that I'm off by a decade. It may be here in ten.

(As an aside: I'm interested in being reminded of films and books that use human implants as a plot device. I can thing of several, including Logan's Run, Total Recall, Minority Report, and Blade Runner. (Notice how the last three are all ultimately from the mind of one man?) Can you think of others?)

On this day at foldedspace.org

2004Thinner (With Pictures)   I'm now three months into my weight loss program. Some days I still feel fat; other days I feel skinny. Today I feel skinny.

2003Skin   Here's something new I haven't tried since moving to the one-long-entry-each-day format: a second entry for today!

P.J. Peed   Sometime later, as Tony bathed Alex, Michael appeared. "P.J. peed," he announced.

2001Neurotic   Sometimes I think I'm a genius. Sometimes I think I'm a moron. What would truly make me happy?

Comments
On 18 April 2005 (08:34 AM), Julie said:

I think before the implants you'll see increased use of biometrics. Like the flash drives that only respond to YOUR thumbprint which are available now, we'll see more of that. IE, those wireless accounts? You can only log on with your retinal scan, or your thumbprint, to some kiosk maybe bundled with an ATM. You'll have a standing account with your mass-market grocery store to just scan you biometrically to identify you and charge your groceries to that account. Etc.


On 18 April 2005 (12:25 PM), Tammy said:

I will die of starvation before I ever get a chip implant anywhere on my body!End of story!


On 18 April 2005 (12:30 PM), dowingba said:

I don't see how implants are any worse, morally speaking, than piercings or tattoos, except that they're actually useful, for a change.


On 18 April 2005 (01:36 PM), Tiffany said:

OK Jd,
I totally agree that it is just a matter of time until we have implants that have out ATM and medical history on them. If the medical history was available today, I would sign up. You can have your dog ‘chipped’ with a name and address, but not yourself. With all my traveling, I would love to know that if I was in an accident that all the doctor had to do was swipe my chip and he would know my name, blood type, medical allergies, emergency contact info, etc.

I love the city wide internet access, it works great. Remember that the cities that have set this up also are freely admitting that they are watching at tracking users of child porn. Remember that those that make the playground get to make the rules.

I think more and more people will get rid of their phone land lines and go to a cell phone only. I would love to think that cell phone implants are impossible. However, I think you are right; it is just a matter of time. I know some people that would love this idea today.

I do not think that average life spans will expand. The average American life span has started decreasing because of obesity. I do think that we will get something like ‘healthy pills’. Take this pill everyday and you will healthy, but it will only last until age 65, when your body will reject the pills and you die. In affect, your life is healthier but shorter. (This would greatly improve the health care/social security systems in the US by the way). I do agree that the more money you have the better your chances.

I think corporations will get stronger and in response demand more custom loyalty. If you sign up for the Wal-Mart discount card, then you can no longer shop at Target. If you do not sign up for the Wal-Mart discount card then the prices will be much higher for you. Many big name grocery stores already do this, but right now you can sign up for everyone card.

The divide between the ‘have’ and ‘have not’ will get larger in the US. The ‘haves’ will not want to admit to the problem until it is too late and the ‘have nots’ organize and start a revolution. This revolution will not be with only guns but a destruction of the computer system main databases (think Fight Club). Causing the ‘haves’ to have no records of what they have. Along in this, the US will continue to divide between line of those that believe in evolution and those that do not, those that agree with abortion and those that do not, those that what to limit population growth (both internal and immigration) and those that think we are fine with growing numbers. One side will win, and become over dominate in the government causing those that do not agree to start hiding their views or move to Canada.


On 18 April 2005 (01:56 PM), J.D. said:

Bravo, Tiffany!

This is exactly the kind of thing I'm looking for. What's more, I love your concept of the strong-arm corporation demanding increased customer loyalty. I'd never considered that possibility before, but now that you mention it, I can see it as a potentiality. I agree that these "discount cards" — such as the one that Kris and I reluctantly use at Safeway — are nascent trouble spots. At present, they're mostly used to track your shopping habits so that more effective marketing can be employed. But what future uses exist for this information?

Also, your comments regarding life span are well taken. I hadn't considered the willfully destructive behaviors that many of participate in. These, of course, are directly attributable, again, to the marketing force of large corporations. Many of us would not, in a less connected world, have issues with addiction. However, we don't live in a less-connected world. We're bombarded by advertising of every sort all the time. We're constantly being manipulated in a host of subtle ways until whoa! we're fat whiskey-drinking computer game players. (Note that I do not disavow personal responsibility for my own weaknesses. However, these weaknesses are exacerbated by corporate marketing, marketing to which I seem especially susceptible.)

Have you ever wondered why there are no ads on foldedspace? It's because I think that advertising and marketing are hugely destructive forces. The good that they offer is a tiny sliver compared to the evil they do in our culture. I do not want to be a party to this. I'd dearly love to have all sorts of Amazon associates links, or google ads, or what-have-you, but I'm not going to do it. I don't want to be a part of the system.

Great comment, Tiff!


On 18 April 2005 (01:56 PM), Dave said:

Although implants may be no more or less moral than piercings or tattoos, I'm not sure that morality has anything to do with it. Pacemakers are implants with transistors in them and it's rare to characterize pacemakers as moral or immoral. Rather, they fill a function for us that justifies the attendant risks of having a pacemaker.

The same thing is probably going to be true for other types of implants. Right now we have the technology to implant a chip in our brains that lets us control a computer's input, and has let a monkey use a robotic arm solely by relaying the monkey's commands through an implanted chip/computer interface. What's more exciting is the possibility that we can do these things WITHOUT having something implanted. In December it was announced that the same thing could be accomplished using a cap with electrodes rather than an implanted device. If that's accurate then a whole host of things becomes technically feasible. I'm sure the military is quite interested in a pilot's ability to pilot a plane without needing to use their hands and feet, for example. The response time should be incredible.

The downside to having other types of implants, such as RFID chips that you can use to facilitate transactions, is that it just seems inherently insecure to have such a thing. This is not to say that the financial transaction would be less secure in a day to day transaction than using cash, but rather that it creates an ability to measure us as individuals that I find disturbing. For example, if I'm chipped and a store is equiped with the tech to read it, who's to say that it wouldn't read me on the way into the store and ascertain whether I can afford to purchase x, y, or z item? Although my bank account balance may not be immediately available, at the very least a unique id code would be, and that could be cross referenced to my credit report which would (in theory) provide the store with the knowledge of my purchasing power. I shudder to think what type of information would ultimately be available to the government and large corportations. JD's right, however, the convenience factor will be what drives these things. That and the fear that our identity could be stolen and bad things happen to our financial picture as a result (never mind the fact that, in theory, we're not responsible for someone else's debts regardless of whether they're using your name or not).

I do disagree with the premise, however, that there's a showdown coming between large corporations and individual consumers. This would be a tremendous deviation from historical precident, which seems to favor the accumulation of capital (and therefore political influence) in the hands of a select few. Short of some blatantly obvious abuse of a significant number (ie, millions) of white, middle-class wage earners, corporations are going to continue doing what they've been doing thus far. Why would that change? Labor unions might have had some impact on this, but they're going the way of the dodo. Thus far, "consumer's unions" don't really exist. The closest thing that we've got to that is AARP, and we're seeing how much they're doing in getting drug costs down, Social Security protected, and Medicaid problems on the table for discussion.

As for my predictions, I think that our tech will continue to get smaller and that laptops, if not palm-tops, will begin to be even more common than they are now. Along with that I think that we'll probably open ourselves up to even more categorization, classification and manipulation by large corporations and government entities. Our privacy will gradually erode to the point that we may not consider it a dangerous thing when Congress passes the Immigrant Chip Act, which requires that all legal aliens to be chipped (either internally or in documents they're required to carry) and subsequently, in order to tell the illegal aliens from citizens, we'll want the citizen's chipped too. And why not? After all, it would be a whole lot more convenient than carrying a wallet/passport/proof of identity and cash, right?


On 18 April 2005 (02:20 PM), Amanda said:

This may be the most forward-thinking post you've ever written. Bravo! It made for truly great reading.

In fact, I would love your permission to post this on my journal. I think more people should be reading this.


On 18 April 2005 (03:57 PM), Lane said:

I can't remember if the following story is true or was used as a cautionary tale for digital implants.

Man has fancy car.
Man gets digital implant in right index finger to identify him as owner of fancy car and to allow starting of said car.
Bad man knows of this.
Bad man cuts of Man's finger to steal car.
Man out one car and one finger.

Not cool.


On 18 April 2005 (07:36 PM), Joel said:

Excellent post. Very thought-provoking.
I've heard the stat about our generation's life span actually declining due largely to obesity many times. I've heard it in main-stream media, and I've heard it from the mouths of very smart epidemiologists.
I'm not entirely on board with it, though. We'll probably get fatter, but trends indicate that we're smoking and drinking less which are very important correlates to improved lifespan.
We're not close to a cure for obesity, but we are close to curing many kinds of cancers.
We're not close to a traditional cure for many famous diseases (AIDS, Hepatitis, Influenza, Disco Fever), but if you look at what actually kills most Americans (Heart attack, Cancer, Strokes, Diabetes, Alzheimer's) we're making lots of progress on a lot of those biggees. Will we have cures in 25 years? I see it happening, though we've been on the verge of declaring victory a few times now.
And then there's the menace of the Superbug, a return to the bad old days when we run out of working antibiotics. So maybe Tiffany's right.

I think some things will remain impressively the same. I think we'll still rely on coal for most of our energy. Despite a huge increase in media access there'll still be nothing good on the hyper-television. I think we'll still read books as we know them. And those damn jetpacks will never pan out!


On 19 April 2005 (07:09 AM), J.D. said:

Think I'm crazy? Think again!

Here's some info on a guy who self-implanted an RFID chip and is acquiring stuff that he can manipulate with it. (The guy has his own web site.)

People with RFID implants call themselves "tagged". They've even begun their own internet forums.

I'm not as forward-thinking as you might believe. This stuff is going to happen soon.


On 19 April 2005 (08:40 AM), dowingba said:

Dave, my morality statement was in response to Tammy's comment: "I will die of starvation before I ever get a chip implant anywhere on my body!End of story!"

For some people, it's about morality, I presume?


On 19 April 2005 (08:56 AM), dowingba said:

And as for JD's concept of implant-shopping -- I don't know how feasible that is. If I walk out of the store close beside someone, what's stopping me from accidentally being charged for their items? Also, the potential for theft is astronomical. How hard would it be to scratch off the barcode on something and just walk out with it? Or just hold the barcode away from the scanners? Not to mention if I just remove my chip, or insert an additional, "jamming chip", I could just never get charged for anything.

Now let's talk about how much this will cost for the storeowners. A scanning system designed to minimize the incerdibly easy theft techniques I outlined above would have to be pretty extravagant. Also, maintenance of it would be expensive, as you would probably want someone checking it for errors every few minutes, as a small error could quickly put you out of business without you even noticing. And the only way to combat the "barcode scratching" technique, would be to have hundreds of hovering surveillance droids -- at least one for each customer in the store -- with a security guard watching a monitor feed from each one constantly(or some really really really sophisticated firmware in each that lets it intelligently sense malicious behaviour).

Seems much easier to just have a cashier or two, if you ask me.


On 19 April 2005 (12:26 PM), Greg said:

JD - 2 things might work against. 1) If you extrapolate certain events it seems likely that we will not be on a sustainable planet in 20 years time. 2) As we move from generation to generation, there is a degeneration in the genetic information that we pass on. In my life, I've seen a change for the worse. This degeneration might take more than 20years before we are so weakened as to be unviable.

Overly pessimistic? Maybe.

Lane - supposedly true - car was a mercedes.

Interesting concern about RFI chips. What can you do in the USA without a driving licence and Social security number? Are you almost there already?

Greg


On 19 April 2005 (02:05 PM), Mom said:

I have been giving this a lot of thought over the last day. I can't see myself having an implant, but as a person with diabetes and other health difficulties, perhaps I would consider it for medical purposes.

What amazes me is how far we have come since your Great-great grandma Hansen's day. She crossed the plains walking behind and helping to push a handcart, and the height of technology in those days was no doubt the gears and levers in primitive versions of factories and the ropes and pulleys for lowering covered wagons over precipices.

She lived into her 80's, so she saw the coming of the telegraph, telephone, television, moving pictures, aircraft and space travel. I wouldn't be surprised to see similarly previously thought to be fantastic advances in the years I have left on the planet.

As it is, I don't even have a cell phone yet -- haven't seen the need. Maybe one of these days I'll get with the 21st century technology and get one. -G-


On 19 April 2005 (02:27 PM), J.D. said:

What amazes me is how far we have come since your Great-great grandma Hansen's day. She crossed the plains walking behind and helping to push a handcart...

Exactly.

This is the kind of thing about which The Education of Henry Adams prompts one to think. One of Adams' main points is that his education, founded on eighteenth century principles and methods, did little to prepare him for the world of the twentieth century. He's amazed by the technology, and wishes that instead of specific training about outdated subjects that he'd received general training on concepts, so that he would have been better able to grapple with technological advances.

He makes several other interesting points and observations, as I hope to discuss in more depth during the rest of the week. (Translate as: I'm writing my next post now, but don't know when it will be finished.)


On 19 April 2005 (02:56 PM), Dave said:

Sue, doctors are already working on insulin pump implants and other implanted diabetes treatments. Apparently Europe is a little further ahead than we are on this because the FDA is much more oriented toward approving drugs than implants or other alternatives.

Greg- I'm not sure that our actual genetic material has degraded, just our standards of acceptable behavior. Yes, we do see more diseases that are genetically based, but how much of that is that a) there's more of us, b) there's better communications, and c) we have enough knowledge about treatments that those flaws don't instantly kill us, they just kill us over a longer period of time.


On 19 April 2005 (04:04 PM), J.D. said:

While researching links for my next entry, I found these predictions for the coming fifty years. I'm not sure how many I agree will come true, but they're hopeful in a way I admire.


On 19 April 2005 (04:49 PM), jeremy said:

I agree with none of his reasons for these things happening. Hopeful is not nearly strong enough a word. Greed is too prevelent and appealing. Look at the youngsters of today! Look at yourselves. The only way for any of these things to come true is a massive, MASSIVE, economic change. Now that is much more likely to be the cause of some of the things listed.


On 19 April 2005 (07:56 PM), dowingba said:

Greg, please explain to me why you think we won't be on a sustainable planet in 20 years. And don't say global warming.


On 16 August 2005 (07:57 PM), david said:

Well, I gotta say, that stuff sound pretty amazing, I'm glad to be alive now in 2005 instead of 1905. But im just thinking, what if technology doesnt advance as fast as people think, or in fact go the other way because of an oil shortage? Oh well, hope you're right


On 16 August 2005 (07:57 PM), david said:

Well, I gotta say, that stuff sound pretty amazing, I'm glad to be alive now in 2005 instead of 1905. But im just thinking, what if technology doesnt advance as fast as people think, or in fact go the other way because of an oil shortage? Oh well, hope you're right


On 16 August 2005 (07:57 PM), david said:

Well, I gotta say, that stuff sound pretty amazing, I'm glad to be alive now in 2005 instead of 1905. But im just thinking, what if technology doesnt advance as fast as people think, or in fact go the other way because of an oil shortage? Oh well, hope you're right


Post a comment
Name


Email Address
(required, not shown)


URL


Comments




Remember info?