Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Technology

The Times' Crystal Ball, Set To 2010 91

Posted by timothy from the and-and-and-nostradomus-predicted-the-internet! dept.
Lotek writes: "The NYT is running a cool 'Special section' from the NYT magazine [free reg. req. tl] this weekend showing off stuff they say we will be using in 2010. They discuss stuff like digital books, Nanotech anti-heart attack prevention, and regeneration. Way cool stuff." The article lists a total of 32 items, and talks about the current state-of-the art as well as potential applications. Pretty cool, but 10 years seems awfully optimistic for some of them.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Times' Crystal Ball, Set To 2010 More

The Times' Crystal Ball, Set To 2010

Comments Filter:
  • After that Tom Baker...
  • Theres a distinct parallel with this and an OS choice. exists primarily to empower the user.

    Well, one notable difference is that when Windows crashes, you don't die. I hope you realize that your favorite toy is the leading non-disease cause of death [cdc.gov] for Americans. (check out the really cool & flexible database search I got that link from, btw)

    I'm kinda OT here--you were complaining about George Jetson cars, not car alternatives, but the attitude that a personal four-seat internal combustion vehicle is a fundamental human right is beginning to get to me. Have you been downtown in a major city lately? I live near Boston, and Car Culture is killing the pleasure of being outdoors in my city. The noise, the stink, the endless loops of oppressive asphalt are choking any sort of pleasure in walking around in public places. And it's not like the motorists are happy either--they're stuck in frustrating jams because a car is not a good tool for getting around a city

    Some other tangential points:

    The Times bit about the personal-bubble rails [nytimes.com] is telling (see, I did have something to say about the actual article!). God forbid that you should actually have to associate with your fellow human beings on your way to work! Perhaps we can refine the technology further and have the rails run inside of buildings as well. Then you'd never have to leave your cube at all--what bliss!

    It's fascinating when people get outraged over the price of gas--after all, everyone knows what it should cost, right? Gas should cost what it did when I first got my driver's license. If the price rises much above that, someone must be cheating.
  • The Coach Who Will Put You In the Zone - Of course, by this time the Official World Sport will be Quake XIV...

    Damn... out of rockets...

  • How about wanting both?
    I can't afford to keep two cars (two cars worth keeping, that is). And my primary need is transportation. So I want automatic everything.
    Now, if I could afford two cars, the first would be just for transportation. Routine. And the second would be for *when I want to drive*. I could take the first in the morning, hate the traffic, and get to work. And when I'm back home, wanting to visit a friend or alike, I could take the car I like.
    THAT is choice. But that's choice by money. In the end I'd want three cars anyway: one smallish coupe for driving in cities and small places, another large luxury sedan for driving everywhere else, and the third would be real no-nonsense racecar that just happens to be street legal. But that'd cost about 20M FIM in Finland, so perhaps I'd better dream of having two cars.
  • Then I think I'll try Peter Davison...
  • This is the kind of driving that I want to let to my car. It's on the 2000th drive home when you get lazy looking at the same thing day after day and your mind drifts just a little bit. Yes the driver still needs control, yes the driver is still the driver, but automation is perfect for those little erands around town.

    This mind drift alone causes a large number of wrecks every day. It kills people, and it injures even more people. The "automation" that is referred to here would make that somewhat less likely. The computer would be doing the redundant work, thus eliminating the human error factor here, but the driver would still need to pay attention to what is going on and tell the computer what to do.


    =================================
  • For a change I'll try Colin Baker...
  • And of course I'll have to do Sylvester McCoy...
  • I think that the NYT is making a small naive mistake in saying a lot of the things are going to be discovered by the year 2010, especially when it comes to nanotechnology implants for heart care, etc. Digital books and the ilk are almost a sure thing, though, as that paritcular field is advancing at a breakneck pace. About the nanotechnology, though. It seems like a lot of people are touting cybernetic limbs and nanobots these days. I don't see much merit other than hopeful thinking in a lot of this. There's a reason behind this, though: the complexity of the proteins that are encoded by the human genome are many orders of magnitude more complicated than the one dimensional genome itself. There's a lot more to figuring out how to make a protein (one of the more likely cadidates for nanodevices) work than just knowing it's sequence. There is, currently, not a whole lot of evidence linking sequence to structure and structure to function, except in rudimentary forms like leucine zippers, etc (biochem. babble there). Beyond that, there would have to be some leaps and bounds in immunology to make a nanomachine that would work in humans very well, lest the body view them as non-self objects and set about destroying them en masse. In any case, I don't see bio-nanotech to be a very fast advancer in the next decade, but who knows, breaktrhoughs happen. About cybernetic limbs, etc. Legs will be difficult. Ever balance a broomstick in your hand? It's easy. Try two, it can be done. Then try three... that's pretty damn hard and the calculations needed to keep it balanced are pretty nasty. Humans are a three-broomstick model, meaning that there would need to be some really nice improvments to make truly functional cybernetic limbs (though the current protheses are nice, and have some feedback, they are no where near a normal leg's funcctionality.) so, there's my rant. Beyond all of the nuances, there's something I'd like to share about attempting to forsee technological advances and scientific endeavors: We don't know what's going to happen. Sure, there are a lot of questions that we have now, and we can see maybe one or two more questions beyond that, but there's things that come up that are always startling when a major project finishes. Look at the human genome project: we have a sequence, we don't know what anything does or what it looks like. Hence, we now are starting a structural genomics program to begin to see if we can predict sgtructure from the sequence for humans, and so forth. And, we don't know if someone in the next 10 years will make a breakthrough and discover some odd brand of physics that shows that quantum mechanics break down under certain circumstances much in the same way that quantum mechanics displays how Newtonian physics breaks down under certain circumstances. We can just look at questions and see what may come of them.... and for all I know, I could just be blithering badger spit right now, too. cheers.
  • And for the Ladies, I'll be Paul McGann...

  • You see, it turns out that a lot of people are still using horses. I'm not saying it's a good thing; I'm pointing out that it's there, it's real... and it's not in any way less relevant just because it's in the Third World.

    Why is it not a good thing? Cars are expensive, unreliable, require maintenance, parts, fuel, and they don't handle rural roads very well.

    In the same situation where cars aren't so good, however, horses excel. They handle rough terrain, they can pull plows and other implements of destruction, eat grass and etc. from a pasture, and can be somewhat self guided.

    The right tool for the job is the one that does the job best for the least investment of time and money. If you decide that horses are a Bad Thing because they aren't "modern" enough, your approaching it from the wrong angle. The coolness factor is a hindrance to the decision making process, not an aid.

  • Think about it: Ten years ago, what would you think of an operating system created by some nobody hacker in Finland?

    To be more accurate, ten years ago, UNIX--then twenty years old--was on everyone's "out" list.

    In 2010 maybe we'll all be using Commodore 64's again?
  • Black boxes to assign blame? We already know what causes the majority of fatal accidents. We know that alchohol/drugs contribute to 60%- 80% of the accidents. That is why they drive recklessly. We don't need black boxes or video cameras to prove that.
  • Actually, significant increaces in non-leathal weapon technology would usher in a age where you can supress riots with military action, making it even easier for tyrants and the LAPD.


  • How the fuck is this informative......

    Fantastic the guy knows how to post a link!!!

    Wohooo now I can't wait until 2010 until we can all achieve this piece of computer super-wizardry
  • More interesting from the Times this week was the Full Page IBM add in Thursdays Business Section which pronounced Linux the wave of the Future:

    "How long does it take for what was once a grassroots movement to become
    a mainstream force?

    How long till the world's fastest growing operating system becomes the
    worlds most popular operating system?

    How long can the advocates of closed and proprietary systems hold the
    forces of open standards at bay?

    How long till your grandmother is ordering her groceries over the Web on
    a system based on Linux?

    Maybe she already has?"

    IBM has tied a free societies social agenda to their profit margin!!
    Not it's a responsibility as Open Sourced users to take the issues of
    Open Sourced code, and the free exchange of information tot he street.
    WE MUST NOW START TO DEFEAT THE DMCA AND PROTECT FAIR
    USE!!!

    Also - the article about Artist for Napstar is very important!!

    http://partners.nytimes.com/library/financial/su nday/061100biz-music-foege.html

    This little baby shows how musicains are right now destributing music for FREE over the internet and RASIING sales of CD's in the Process!!!!

    Like Duh!!! Exposure creates sales!!! Who would of thunk it!!! .... again

  • The Moller Skycar is the longest-running piece of vaporware in aviation. Moller has been working on that thing since the mid 1960s. By 1974, he had advertising brochures (I have one) and even ran ads in Business Week. It's been about two years from flying for a quarter century. Over $100 million has gone into the thing. And he still doesn't have a flying prototype, although they've been able to get a few feet off the ground.

    Considering that the 1950s AVROcar [railvideo.com] actually flew, that's not a good track record.


  • I would be pissed off my friend the other guy that did this bit of computer super-wizardry received an "Informative"

    I vote you get one as well!!!
  • My data would read "eyes moved off-screent: interested in co-worker's ass." -

    That is one of the funniest things that I have read. Slashdot always impresses me with clever postings but that easily takes the cake.....

    I know I don't add anything to this dicussion - don't sell yourself so short I was nearly falling asleep and this had me on the floor!!!
  • There is one already.

    It's called diet & exercise.

  • Black boxes to assign blame? We already know what causes the majority of fatal accidents. We know that alchohol/drugs contribute to 60%- 80% of the accidents. That is why they drive recklessly. We don't need black boxes or video cameras to prove that.

    I think the statistic you want is around 50% last I heard. Also, that statistic is only where alcohol and drugs are related to the accident. If a drunk staggers into the road, and you swerve to miss him and hit a telephone pole, that is alcohol related. If you are on antihistimines and they hit you harder than you expected, that is drug related. If someone has a couple of drinks and their BAC is around .05, it's alcohol related. If I had to guess, I would say that 25-30% is more accurate.

    On a side note, one thing that really yanks my chain is when organizations (MADD) feel it's all right to lie or misrepresent statistics if it's for a good cause.

  • One of the more interesting articles is entitled The Only Book You Ever Need, although the title may be a little misleading. This is best illustrated by the following quote for the article giving the essential bits.
    The key is electronic ink -- which Jacobson has already invented. His "e-ink" is composed of millions of microscopic capsules, each of which contains a soup of blue dye and tiny flecks of white pigment. When the capsules are exposed to an electrical charge, the white particles inside move around. A negative charge draws the particles to the top, turning the capsule white; a positive charge pushes them to the bottom, under the dye, so the capsule appears dark. Under a microscope, a sheet of e-ink looks like a bed of sea anemones winking open and shut. Viewed en masse, the capsules -- some black, some white -- give rise to letters and images, like placard-bearing fans in a football stadium.

    Coated with e-ink, an ordinary sheet of paper becomes reusable. Picture a special "printer" (Jacobson's team has already built it) that contains electrodes. A page of e-ink text goes in, the electrodes zap the e-ink -- switching some microcapsules from black to white or white to black, leaving others as they were -- and a page of new text comes out. Lately, Jacobson has dispensed with the printer altogether and has moved the electrodes onto the paper itself. He has created signs that consist of a sheet of e-ink sandwiched between two plastic sheets, one of which is essentially a transparent electrode. The sign's display can be updated by pager: from a remote computer, to a satellite, to an antenna, which sends radio signals to the sign's circuit board, which sends electrical signals to the e-ink. The power required to update the text is minuscule, a 10th of a watt.

    In 1997, this ink became the foundation for a start-up company, E Ink. Last June, E Ink's first commercial product -- updatable signs, based on the electrode-sandwich design -- began appearing in Eckerd drugstores. So far, however, the signs' circuitry is capable of producing changeable letters no smaller than two inches tall -- not exactly a portable "Moby-Dick." So Jacobson is working on making everything smaller, designing circuits so tiny and cheap that a printer could spray them onto paper, alongside the e-ink. The electronics, in effect, would be disposable. Jacobson's ultimate goal is what he calls "radio paper": electronic paper, coated with e-ink, with tiny transistors embedded in it to act as electrodes, solar cells and radio receivers. So equipped, the average sheet of paper would be able to upload pretty much anything, even video, using no more energy than it draws from ambient light.

    "I fundamentally think five years is the right time scale for static paper to be phased out and replaced by radio paper," Jacobson says. His investors evidently agree. So far, E Ink has attracted more than $50 million in venture capital, much of it from book and newspaper publishers like the Hearst Corporation. Jacobson's primary competitor is Nick Sheridon at Xerox PARC, who has been thinking about electronic ink for the past nine years. Sheridon has developed an ink similar to Jacobson's: called Gyricon, it is composed of tiny spheres -- white on one side, colored on the other -- that rotate in response to an electric charge. With backing from 3M, Sheridon aims to enter the sign business soon ("We should have a product next year"), then proceed on, like Jacobson, to reusable paper, books and newsprint.

    Needless to say, your newspaper, when printed in electronic ink, would be utterly transformed. Which is to say, it would stay much the same, at least outwardly. The same oversize sheets of paper, the same soothing rustle. Go ahead, leave it splayed across the breakfast table: tomorrow -- or in an hour, or however often you like -- the contents will be updated by radio signal. Subway riders, desist in your origami antics: you can download your newspaper into a more manageable format -say, a book. Even your book could be smaller. The book's contents could be stored in microelectronics in the binding and called onto the page as you need them, even as you read. So unless you really need all 3,312 pages at once, your "Remembrance of Things Past" could simply fit in a pamphlet.

    I can see several downsides right now. Revolutionaries, revisionists, thought police, hackers, all editing and correcting books and newspapers on the fly. No more cutting out cartoons or coupons. Constantly changing shifting content. Spam. No archives that get stored in libraries.

    Hey, this sort of sounds like the web right now, but with less of the desirable parts.

    hmmmmmmmm .....

  • What I want is a tiny tiny LCD screen at the bottom of my glasses to tell the time. Is that so hard? I'll bet that could be done now!
  • One of the stories linked from the article is about tanning compounds:
    Hadley and his research colleagues engineered a synthetic molecule that is a thousand times more powerful than M.S.H., and in 1984 Hadley thought it was ready for trials on humans. So he injected himself with it one afternoon. Three weeks later he looked in his bathroom mirror, and staring back at him was this other Hadley with, yes, beach-ready brown skin. Unfortunately, this other Hadley was also 10 pounds lighter and had a very un-beach-ready case of priapism -- the dread perpetual erection.

    Lesse: a drug that

    Makes you look better

    makes you lose weight

    Keeps you "up"

    Sounds good, ship it!

  • But to a signifigant portion of drivers, a car is also a form of recreation. I personally fit into this category. ... Theres a distinct parallel with this and an OS choice.

    This is an electronic book parallel. You want to feel the turn of every page, stroke the texture of the paper, and hand-write notes in the margins. In the future, you'll get to have your paper books, but you'll pay more for them. In that same future, you might not get to drive your own car, because car accidents kill and maim people. Meanwhile, I don't see anyone lining up to legislate against paper cuts.

  • You see, it turns out that a lot of people are still using horses. I'm not saying it's a good thing; I'm pointing out that it's there, it's real... and it's not in any way less relevant just because it's in the Third World.

    Well, actually I got a horse myself, and am just about to go riding after I finish this ;)

    You are right though that the car is far from obtainable for everybody, especially in the poorer countries.
    My point was maybe not clear but I was more thinking about those happy enough to have the economical means to make a choise. Amongst those the car is a primary item.
    Just look at Russia & eastern Europe for example, one of the first things people get once they have the economical resources for it, is a car

    In many parts of the world a deasent car seems to be even more important than deasent living!

    And the horse is deffenitly not extinct, but if you take US or europe, the number of hiways far outnumbers the number of horsetrails (is that the right word for a "horse road"?)

    So to sumarize I think that one day suddenly the car will be obsoleted, and people will tell children storys of the "primitive old days" when people had to own and driva a car, but I'm rather sceptical to those that try to predict what this replacement will be.

  • Claiming that quantum cryptography will bring impenetrable privacy to the masses is rather naive. Decent encryption is already available. How many people use it? The only thing that brings security to the masses is ease of use. If it takes any effort at all, no one will use it. Besides, encryption is only a small part [counterpane.com] of security.

  • We do not need advanced technology to save lives. We just have to have the political will to stand up to the auto companies and demand that the road slaughter stops.

    How many years did it take to get even seat belts/safety glass in cars? After people started using them lives were saved. Princess Diana might be alive today if she had worn her seat belt. She was in a very expensive Mercedes with all the latest safety equipment. The only person to survive the crash was the bodyguard who was wearing his seat belt. What was the cause of the crash? A drunk driver in an overpowered car. BTW air bags did not help in this crash. They are expensive and have probably killed more kids and short people than would have been saved with seat belts alone.

    It is ironic that if a plan or train crashes, there is a big investigation and whole fleets are grounded until the problem is fixed yet flying/rail are the two safest methods of travel. The auto companies on the other hand are allowed to produce vehicles that are inherently dangerous. This is shown about the number of auto fatalities that kill more people in a long weekend then all the air planes crashes in a year.

    The auto companies could make a safe car but would anyone buy it? They would have to if there were stricter govt regulations. Right now the government pays lip service to safety.

    Here are some simple solutions that would save 10,000 lives a year:

    If the govt was serious about safety, they would not allow cars on the road that can do 150mph when the speed limit is 60mph.

    Put real bumpers at a standard height on all vehicles.

    Make breath analysers mandatary to start a car or at least on known impaired drivers.

    Annual drivers test for anyone over 65.

    The other best solution for reducing fatalities is divided highways. Expensive but saves head on collisions.

    BTW If you want to see the real 'Jetsons Flying Car' check out the Moller Skycar [moller.com].


  • Shit, I'm still waiting for my personal hovercraft and helicopter.

    ======
    "Rex unto my cleeb, and thou shalt have everlasting blort." - Zorp 3:16


  • They said there would be flying cars and all phones would have video screens so you could see the person you're talking to.

    Would anyone care to buy my POS 7 year old flying car?

    Maybe. Point the phone at it a sec...

    ======
    "Rex unto my cleeb, and thou shalt have everlasting blort." - Zorp 3:16


  • Hackers Strike Wireless Net, Hundreds Die In Hail Of Gunfire! Film at 11!
    And now, the conclusion of tonight's episode of Ally McBeal...

    ======
    "Rex unto my cleeb, and thou shalt have everlasting blort." - Zorp 3:16

  • Lesse: a drug that Makes you look better makes you lose weight Keeps you "up" Sounds good, ship it!

    Damn...beat me to it [only cause I slept in :) ].
    Sad thing is I think it would actually sell. Heck, he should have put it on the market in the 80's when he first tried it. It probably would have sold better then. Seeing as the 80's seemed to be the decade of 'get tan, lose weight, get laid'...
    And we wouldn't still be hearing Viagra jokes all the time.

    Ender

  • Why stop there? If it prevents the prevention of heart attacks, it causes heart attacks. Just among my coworkers I can think of at least three people who would benefit from undergoing this procedure . . .
  • Of course in cities streetcars were extremely popular for roughly 50 years. Originally they were pulled by horses, but they moved on to electric motors. (and in the case of San Francisco, being pulled by cables)

    I just think that in different environments, different modes of transportation work better. In the sticks, you want a car. In the middle of the city, you want streetcars or subways. I lived in the Boston area for five years. I believe I drove downtown only twice, because it was such an amazing pain in the ass. Far easier to drive to a subway station and take the T in the rest of the way.
  • IT'S THE YEAR 2000 GODDAMMIT! I WANT MY FLYING CAR!

    Now look. It's the middle of June 2000. Still no flying cars. Six months ago my last car died & I had to get a new one -- a plain old Neon. That's fine, I guess, but really upsets my years long plan here, namely to get a flying fuckin car in the year 2000. GODDAMMIT!

    Alright, mister dee-troit automotive aeronautical engineers. You've got exactly five and a half months to ship me out something with wings and a great big fuckin rocket strapped on to the back, and if I can't spend new year's eve flying from here to Paris like Charles Frickin Lindbergh then I'm gonna take my plain old black bomber and I'm gonna slam it into your shiny corner office in Dearborn instead -- GOT IT?

    Right!



  • And given that even using a WAP phone is a pain in the butt, what use would internet access on a watch be? How the hell are you gonna conduct a conversation with someone on a watch? What about power?

    Keyboard? How quaint!

    Why not simply speak into the damn thing? After all, mobile phones have already progressed to the point (at least in the UK, YMMV) already dial numbers and navigate around your voice mailbox using only your voice. (See Orange's Wildfire [orange.co.uk], for example.)

    Mobiles have already shrunk to wristwatch size - I know Toshiba at least have produced such a toy. Using a WAP phone is a pain because most of the current products have been rushed to market without any real thought going into them. (As usual. Sigh.)

    I think you're guilty of the same sin as the NYT - you're not thinking far enough out of the box.

    To address the comment about losing these items, well, I already think nothing of walking around with £150 worth of mobile in one pocket and £200 of palmtop in the other. (Plus god knows how much valuable data on it.) And of course keys to £15,000 worth of house contents...

  • Ok, you asked for it! Ten years ago I was running an operating system by some nobody hacker in Finland! Well, Ok, maybe 9 years ago...
  • And then there's the phaser. Yeah.. right.. let's remember why people use guns - to KILL people.

    Not generally. Yes, guns are used for murder, but so are many other things. But most uses of guns are defensive -- something on the order of millions of uses every year, in this country. The vast majority of which are never reported.

    The point of a gun is to threaten. The point of a threat is to force people to act differently, to constrain their freedom.

    Naturally, it is hard to communicate a threat without anything to back it up. Hence the killing power of guns. But at least for many uses, one does not need to be able to hurt or kill to communicate a threat that is sufficient to change people's behavior. It depends on what people fear.

    The taser is not used much not because of its inability to threaten, but its general unreliability and inutility for a lot of situations that people worry about. 12 cops standing around Rodney King are safe enough to be able to taze. One guy in a subway confronted by a gang is not realistically protected without the ability to either stun *all* of them, or threaten real bodily harm.

  • I thought the only mobile that had voice recognition/activation was one of the Philips models? I don't know anyone who has one mind, but i have heard anycdotal stories that they are a pain in the ass to use.

    Using voice navigation on a mobile (Phone or internet appliance), is gonna be a bad idea in a noisy environment. Train companies are already creating "mobile free" cariages, so i can't see people taking to inconsiderate users shouting "Aatch Tee Tee Pee Colon Slash Slash" on a bus or train.

    Voice recognition software has already been discused on Slashdot (Can't remember the exact article), and many problems were rasied then. Personally, i don't see voice recognition to take off at home for a long time, let alone in a mobile solution.
  • That is pretty cute. Sending authorization requests to 'cock' a gun.

    A server system would make DOS attacks in coordination with terrorist strikes a vulnerability.

    Here's a simpler idea. A pin number that unlocks a gun for 30 minutes. transmits gps data through teh cell hone network. Could even have a '911' (send help here) button on the gun. Basically add cheap cell phone and gps guts to a gun without headset and lcd panels, so it shouldn't even be that expensive.
  • Wait a minute, I've read this somewhere before. Who are they copying?

  • We will all live in bubble cities on the moon, have robot maids and take a personal helicopter to our work on the asteroid mines.

  • Nanotech can't be here in ten years....
    ...just like 640k will be enough for everybody. With the pace of technology nowadays, you can't say how long it will take. Think about it: Ten years ago, what would you think of an operating system created by some nobody hacker in Finland?
  • Ten years ago, what would you think of an operating system created by some nobody hacker in Finland?

    Obviously enough people thought it was a good idea....bare in mind that 0.0.1 was available 10 years ago :)

  • Uh...hello? (Score:3)

    by Vanders ( 110092 ) on Sunday June 11, 2000 @02:05AM (#1010929) Homepage
    "I want a wristwatch that brings the world to me," he says. "With Internet access and a cell telephone. It would have my credit- and cash-card numbers installed inside too, so I wouldn't have to carry money and would only press a 'pay' button to buy things.

    Ooookaay. Anyone else see the problem with this? How many times have you lost a watch, or had one stolen? And given that even using a WAP phone is a pain in the butt, what use would internet access on a watch be? How the hell are you gonna conduct a conversation with someone on a watch? What about power?

    It's like this throughout most of the articles. It seems that they've just taken everyday stuff, and either minaturised it and/or added AI too it, without putting any real thought into it. Heard it all before, NYT.

  • Nanotech anti-heart attack prevention

    Excuse me, but wouldn't it be better to have a heart attack prevention device?
  • coded pulses of light, for example, in a fiber-optic cable that is infiltrated by a spy -- leaves an unalterable trace that immediately betrays the presence of an eavesdropper.

    This means:

    1. The end of routers

    2. A new form of hacking (lezz disturb some info traffic)

    3. A lot of stress for developers if they want that 2010 deadline

  • People have been slamming the "Watch that is your lifeline to the world" article, and I think they're missing the point.

    Read the whole article and we see people opting for a different way of plugging in. When I personally think of the net, I think of browsing the web, which is like spending time in the archtype library. When these people use their i-phones they want a data feed, but they only want it to answer quick questions or pass them little notes. They're not in cyberspace to read, they're not in cyberspace at all, they want something that will sit on their wrist and pass them notes or hang from their belt and play them their music. The most visually intense thing they want to do is to connect to distant friends through video phones.

    It's a different way to integrate the net into society. It might be the way that most non-geeks opt for.

  • (Silly /.: Actual article title should be "The Operating System You Ignore")

    Am I the only one who thinks that in 10 years time, operating systems /will/ be operating systems, and just that?

    Windows, linux and MacOS will all perform the same functions the same way you'd expect them to. Something very similar to an anti-trust case happens, where it is shown that APIs need to be homogenized for all operating systems, so it's relatively easy to port code from one OS to another.

    Java dies. Few tears are shed.

    Focus goes back to what computing was originally about: Making it easy for us lazy humans.

    Life is good.
  • It wouldnt quite be paintball anymore, but it would certainly kick ass. As for the the police yeah just zap most anyone in sight, put the plastic cuffs on then sort them out.
  • Why is it that future predictions about transportation always follow the tune of "we know better how to transport you from one place to another"?

    Every so often you hear about how some new is going to revolutionize everything and how cars are going the way of the dinosaurs. I understand that to the majority of people, a car is a simple means of transportation. It gets you from where you are to where you want to be with a minimum of fuss, very convienient. But to a signifigant portion of drivers, a car is also a form of recreation. I personally fit into this category.

    I'm one of those people that insist on a manual gearbox. Keep your automatic transmissions, semi-automatic "clutchless" manual transmissions (duh, the clutch is the whole point), and definately keep your ride damping systems that inhibit me from feeling exactly what the car is doing.

    I know some people don't share even a nanometer of my view on this, but I'm hoping the majority here are open-minded to see the importance. Theres a distinct parallel with this and an OS choice. exists primarily to empower the user. You have full control of the entire system, and can change anything to suit your needs, if you so desire. exists primarily to shield the user from the complexities of a complex, flexible device in order to . I want the power of the former, it extends my abilities instead of hindering them, it keeps me in control.

    I want my clutch, I like being able to feel the road, feel the yaw of my automobile, and adjust the amount of power getting to the wheels to compensate for traction. I refuse to give up one iota of control in the name of progress, since thats not really progress. Make it better by all means, independant suspension, variable-valve timing, electronic engine controls, all make a vehicle perform better, and helps the driver. Trying to completely replace the driver defeats the purpose.

    Unless of course, you're just interested in getting from A to point B, and don't care how you get there (in which case, what are you doing here?).

  • Maybe some day, have you seen the Sony Glasstron LCD video Displays. They are Video Glasses so that you can watch DVDs and whatnot.
  • As others have pointed out, to get around the registration, just replace www with partners

    ie change http://www.nytimes.com/library/magazine/home/index .html to

    http://partners.nytimes.com/library/magazine/home/ index.html or click here [nytimes.com]


  • http://www.conversa.com

    And I've never lost or had a watch stolen.
  • Has anyone noticed that many of the things we have today were being written about and shown in movies and on television decades before they were in public use. I would suggest looking to television for future advances. For example, in Earth: Final Conflict, they use small devices called "globals" which can be used as cell phones, limited internet portals, personal organizers, and other things like that. With the advances in miniaturization of power cells, and the incresingly power efficient systems, these may soon become a common reality. Also, has anyone considered the possibilities of portable full-VR systems? The possibilities of VR used in concert with "Motionware"? This could allow people to be in conferences while in a car or on a plane. Just a few thoughts. "I hate quotations, I don't know enough to make a good one. You tell me what you know."
  • Sorry.

    http://www.samsung.com/news/1999/sec1103.html
  • Nanotech anti-heart attack prevention
    Excuse me, but wouldn't it be better to have a heart attack prevention device?

    No!!! It is imperative that we prevent anti-heart attacks! If one of those baby's came in contact with a real heart attack it could completely annihilate the person having a heart attack!

  • I remember weekly reader ran a similar type of thing for 1993 when I was in 2nd grade (1988)

    They said there would be flying cars and all phones would have video screens so you could see the person you're talking to.

    Would anyone care to buy my POS 7 year old flying car?

    I hate articles like that... I became disillusioned and bitter when 1993 came and I couldn't fly!
  • What a complicated technology. Imagine creating a disposible paper that generates its own electricty from ambiant radiation and has some user interface for changing its content. It all seems rather plodding compared to the lovely data glasses /. reported on a few months ago [slashdot.org].

    I think what will happen is everyone will be wearing data glasses fused with gpsr or some other broadband packet radio technology. The glasses will look like very dark sunglasses when you are jacked in.

    You may find yourself talking to a group and gradually all the glasses will get darker.

  • Skycars will be here "real soon now". Take your pick. If you have the bucks you can buy a City Hawk - flying car [quantummusic.com] Looks like a star wars speeder. There is the Xantus [vtol1.com] and the Moller Skycar [moller.com]. It actually looks like a Jetsons car. Cool Popular Mechanics cover here [quantummusic.com].
  • WHAT! This isn't a 5 by now!?!! This is one of the funniest things I've read on /. ever so mod this guy up man but please! :(

    Be Seeing You,

    Jeffrey.
  • Judge Dredd had a gun like this, only his could fire six kinds of bullets. And all of them would kill you.

    High Explosive! Badaamm!!!

    Heh!

  • - Their predictions are based on toys for children.

    By the way, I once believed to have seen the safe Car driven by a Bot, but I soon found out that it was just a taxi driven by a sleepless driver.

    The true smashing invention: A gene who can pre-translate the genetic code, predict any future stupidity in the unborn, and finally terminate the fetus. (One possible ad might sound like: "It takes *very* little to make a better world")

  • Re:The transportation song & dance ... (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Isn't a quantum leap a very small change?
  • I remember seeing something about the Japanese building a car with collision detection sensors in the front, preventing it from driving into obstacles and other assorted shit. The car's computer would basically bring the vehicle to a halt. I think it was on the BBC's Tomorrow's World, or maybe the Discovery channel.

    What I would like would be a gadget to tell me how far I am from the car in front, and whether I'm going to back into a wall in a car park ;-)

  • The Severed Limb That Regrows Itself?

    Actually, I'm waiting for the extra limb option.

    From childhood I've dreamed of replacing my existing arms with a flamethrower and a chainsaw... but sadly this would reduce my effectiveness as a data entry clerk significantly (up to 20%, by my estimates).

    However, if I could grow two new arms, then I could have the best of both worlds, and finally achieve my potential as a human being.

    The future can't get here soon enough!

    -David Wong, Pointless Waste of Time.com [pointlesswasteoftime.com]
  • oh, automatic transmissions are not only lame, wasteful, and overly costly (ie. you're a sucker for paying more than $250 for the OPTION), but they are UNSAFE as well.

    I drive my car without a working speedometer. It's just busted, I'm too lazy to get it fixed. But I almost always know within 5mph what my speed is, because I know what gear I'm in, and the rev-tone of my engine. (it's a red convertible, often followed by cops, never pulled over). 99% of auto drivers can't say the same thing, they have to quite often take their eyes off the road to look at the speedo, because they have no freakin clue what gear they're in. It's an important detail that's been taken away from the driver. Yes, you CAN get from A->B without it. But forcing the driver to interrupt his or her vision of the road (and obstacles, and pedestrians) periodically is not an improvement.

    If it ain't broke, fix it 'til it is!
  • Not sure about seat belts, those came very late, but safety glass was a very early adaptation, in the US.

    Henry Ford lost a dear freind test-driving the Model T. He was thrown through the plate-glass windsheild in an otherwise very minor collison. This prompted the change to safety glass.

    Another potentially true urban legend states that the founders of Volvo lost their child in a car accident, so they started a car company that made cars with safety as the #1 priority.

    The rest of the bastards in the automotive industry don't give a rat's ass about the thousands of poor bastards every year who are partially scooped by emergency crews from wrecks alongside the highway.

    If it ain't broke, fix it 'til it is!

  • LoL... how true, moderate this up!

    --
    Jesse Tie Ten Quee - tie@linux.ca - highos@highos.com
    http://highos.dhs.org
  • you think they would get away with posting direct links? of course they would know about the trick, they don't want to piss off the NYtimes tho,...
  • The Sunday Times do this all the friggin' time-- whenever they're really stuck for ideas for their colour supplement, somebody goes `Hey, we haven't done one of those House Of The Future articles for a good few weeks now!'. Arrggghh-- and they get paid for doing it, too!

    You'd think these sorts of wanky journalistic daydreams might have moved on from the 50s, but oh noooooo: they get some artists in to draw some cheesy pictures of happy smiling housewives watching a robot octopus prepare dinner while another one files her toenails (very progressive :-) ). The children are inanely grinning at the pleasure they're receiving from being taught at home by a robo-tutor and (here's the science bit-- concentrate) the dad is teleworking over the internet having 200-way video conferencing with everybody in his office now that every home in the whole world has been fitted with free 1,000Gb Ethernet. Obviously nobody's imagination stretches to the fact that if daddy had all this technology at his disposal he'd be downloading porn and spending 24hrs a day attached to a catharter and drip feed, and his dick stuck in a robo-masturbator machine for uninterrupted pleasure.

    Okay, so journalists all over the world, stop this House of the Future nonsense. It's not big, it's not clever and it won't impress your mates.
  • All that stuff seems just dandy, but STILL NO JET PACKS!!! Come on, it's not that hard to do, I'm sure! For the love of god, we can make little cellular robots, but we can't strap a rocket and a helmet to a guy and make him fly?! --- evel aka matt "goddamnit."

  • How the hell are you gonna conduct a conversation with someone on a watch?

    I don't know what it is like in the US, but around here (Norway, Sweden, Finland), you know you're old when you find yourself unable to type fast enough to have a conversation on SMS. The kids do, and they do it fast. So, the watch is smaller allright, but not that much smaller, so I wouldn't be surprised if people will learn to type fast enough to have a conversation through a watch. You remember the tiny keyboards you had on wristwatch calculators...?

  • Think about it, have you ever considered how much redundant driving the average person does? Have you ever thought about the drive that takes you to work and back? Have you made the drive to work so many times that the car can practicly drive itself? So let it.

    This is the kind of driving that I want to let to my car. It's on the 2000th drive home when you get lazy looking at the same thing day after day and your mind drifts just a little bit. Yes the driver still needs control, yes the driver is still the driver, but automation is perfect for those little erands around town.

    I would like nothing better than to jump in my car in the morning and punch in "gas station - work" and make a few phone calls in safety while my car does everything else.
    ___

  • Where is the treadmill that runs to fast and swallows George Jetson ?
    ___
  • Bah, most of that is seriously paranoid and expensive ('cept maybe bumper standards), and I certainly don't want more greenspace dug up for bigger roads.

    There is one solution that is cheap and effective. If we had black box devices in all cars it would make it much easier to establish blame in accidents. A little accountability would go a long way toward making people drive more responsibly.

    As a more expensive voluntary measure, people should install cameras mounted on the front and rear windows, kind of like police cars. That way, if you are in accident, or witness one, you have visual proof that the other driver was driving recklessly, even if he does not have a black-box himself. It could also be used to establish reckless behavior long before the accident takes place.
  • You beat me to it! I was going to point that out... hahahahahah! But perhaps this "anti heart attack prevention" technology does have a use: For young supermodels that like to marry aging millionaires and want to make sure they inherit their millions rather quickly... heheh
  • or can you?

    They make mention of a "virtual immune system" injected into your blood stream. This is anything but virtual. It may be "synthetic", "ancillary", "supplimentary", or" "replacement" but it is not "virtual".

    "Improved-solids potato?" A starchy laxative substitute?

    I like how they personify foods, as in this quote: "A huge part of the joy of the villains, Ice Cream and Fudge Sauce, is that they have no intention of improving the quality of our lives; they represent unrepentant decadence." I once at 14 fudge-cicles at a sitting... and then 10 the next evening. Decadence? No. Flatulence? Ahhhh yeah...

    Vaccines in bananas = healthier primates.
    Elevators that move laterally as well as vertically... complete with "candy-hooks" and and Oompa-Loompa attendant.

    I'm not digging this "interest tracker"... an application that tracks eye movement to see what your interest is drawn to on the web page you're looking at. My data would read "eyes moved off-screent: interested in co-worker's ass."

    A "wristwatch that brings the world to you" does not exactly "put the world at your finger tips." Dick Tracy's Watchphone was killer. Web browsing on your wristwatch is prohibitive. I kind of liked the "Demolition Man" idea of subdermal chip on the back of one's hand used for such things as opening doors, buying things, receiving fines for swearing, etc. I would like to see a watch that monitors blood-sugar and can interface with an insulin/glucose which regulates blood-sugar. The make mention of a heart-rate monitor... how about an adrenaline monitor? As your angst rises, your watch can scream, "Watch out! He's gonna kick your ass!" A libido monitor?

    A little out of context fun: "My parents got me this last year," says Tanimoto, showing off her small, silvery accessory. "It's surprising how quickly it has become a necessity;..." What are the Japanese parents teaching their children?

    Captain Kirk didn't use phasers to kill enemies? Why the different settings, or is the TNG? "Set your phasers to 'Hemmorhoid'. We don't want to kill anyone, just make their sphincters burn a little."

    That brain-electrode thingy rocks. Why not insert electrodes into the speech-core (Boca's area? I forget) and perform speech recognition? Hook it up to that USB speech-to-text device I mentioned somewhere else. You could have to worlds first USB human. We could learn what dogs are saying! YES!

    This brain cursor thing rocks. It's talking about the onscreen cursor becoming a part of the test subject. That's absolutely amazing to me. If they could provide him feedback (so booting into Windows caused pain...oh wait, it does...)

    Evidently, by the jist of this article, when my watch is screming, "He's going to kick your ass!", I will be imaginging myself kicking some ass, and actually living the fantasty! Rock On!

    Believe me, I know I don't add anything to this dicussion, I just like to tell people, "I'm published on the Internet!"

    Talk to you later, -J.D.

  • Looking at the Titles... (Score:3)

    by hypergeek ( 125182 ) on Sunday June 11, 2000 @07:57AM (#1010964)
    I'm a bit skeptical about these things...

    For example:

    • The Teddy Bear That Knows Your Name - What purpose would this serve? Maybe useful as a witness to murder trials..

      Judge: "Who killed Mr. Jones?"

      Teddy Bear (Eyes Light Up With Murderous Glee): "BOB!"

    • The Lawn that Never Needs Mowing - I think they have this at stadiums already... it's called 'astroturf'... it's also useful for promoting your company's "Freedom to Imitate^H^H^H^H^H^H^HInnovate".

    • The Makeup that Changes Your Identity - Isn't that what makeup is for... to change your identity to that of a slightly-less-ugly version of yourself?

    • The Car That Won't Crash - Does it run Linux, or BSD?

    • The Jet that Sees The Runway - Already does... so do all the passengers as they scream loudly in a futile attempt to wake the pilot up.

    • The Train You're Never Late For - Why not just invent the "Person Who's Never Late For a Train". Making trains is hard... making people is a lot more fun!

    • The Mind that Moves Objects - My mind already does that... first, it commands my hand to move, which in turn can manipulate almost any object!

    • The Mall Where Every Price is Negotiable - It's called a "Bazaar". We've had those since ancient times, and they still exist in some form in many third-world countries. It's a sobering thought to realize that the ancients and the third world are 10 years more advanced than we are!

    • The Weatherman Who Is Always Right - "Smoggy Tuesday, with a chance of Acid Rain".. Honestly now, by 2010 who will actually go outside in the first place? Better to invent domed cities so weather forecasts are irrelevant!

    • The Scanner That Will Run Your Kitchen - Dammit! I'll run my own kitchen, thank-you-very-much! None of this "Man vs. Machine" struggle in my house!

    • The Tongue With Perfect Taste - I've already got one, and it tells me that the three highest forms of food in the Universe are Beef Fried Rice, Lemon Chicken, and Frosted Lucky Charms (They're Magically Delicious!)

    • The Gun That Won't Kill Anybody - Does it squirt water when you squeeze the trigger?

    • The Detective that Every Jury Believes - Come on! Juries will believe anything. If you're ever on trial by jury, just remember that your life hangs in the hands of twelve people who weren't smart enough to get out of jury duty!

    • The Surveillance Camera That Picks Out the Bad Guys - Okay... I'm guessing that the one with the ski mask and the pistol who's holding up the cashier... might be the one you're looking for. I doubt that any machines we're likely to produce any time soon will come close to predicting human behavior as accurately as a properly trained human. Mentats, anyone?

    • The Suit That Makes You Feel As Good as Prozac - What a useless invention! Call me back when you invent the Shorts and T-shirt that make me feel as good as Prozac! Of course, whenever a tight pair of shorts and t-shirt are on a hot member of the female species nearby, I do feel as good as Prozac! Anyway, what's this suit do that Prozac doesn't? (Besides keeping you from being stark raving naked)

    • The Daytrader That Puts Your Mind At Ease - So, basically one who's not likely to go crazy and shoot up a nearby trading office, right?

    • The Code That Can't Be Broken - I've got one right here:

      asdfjasdfhalvbbdnlfkhghfdsklgjhasdkrjw;ls40985u394 shafkjh4w5jh3q2w4oiuw4oiusdf8-0uear543u!

      Nobody's ever gonna extract any useful message out of that one, not you, not me, not its intended recipient! Beat that, Future!

    • The Only Book You'll Ever Need to Read - I nominate Dune.

    • The Document That Can't Be Forged - Puh-leeze... the Babylonians had that... they used a protective clay envelope around the original cuneiform tablet, with an identical copy original message written and sealed in duplicate on the front of the envelope. If the clay envelope were broken, the document was no good.

    • The Genetic Report Card That Will Tell You If Your Embryo Will Get Prostate Cancer - Not too many embryos get prostate cancer... usually it's middle-aged men.

    • The Bathroom Where You Can Give Yourself a Daily Brain Scan - Just remember to press the button marked "Scan", NOT the one marked "Flush"!

    • The Severed Limb That Regrows Itself - I'd rather have the body that regrows its severed limbs...

    • The Coach Who Will Put You In the Zone - Of course, by this time the Official World Sport will be Quake XIV...

    • The Watch That Is Your Lifeline to the World - Ever lost a watch? How 'bout losing the "Watch That Is Your Lifeline to the World"? Not a pretty thought, is it?

    • The Phone That Puts New York in Montana - Who in their right mind would want to do that?!

    • The Dead Celebrity Who Comes Back to Life - Elvis?

    • The Blind Date Who Is Your Destiny - Or at least, so says the mutual friend who sets the two of you up on the date in the first place!

    • The Company Where Everybody's a Temp - You mean that they'll still have Microsoft in 10 years?!

    • The Elevator You Never Have to Wait For - Suuuure... next thing you know they'll invent one that you never have to wait for and gets you some exercise while you're in it!

      (Hint: they're called "Stairs".)

    • The French Fry That Will Save Your Life - by giving your worst enemy a fatal heart attack?

    • The Doctor That Floats in Your Bloodstream - Aren't those called "white blood cells"?

    • The Genius Who Sticks Around Forever - Like the talking celebrity heads-in-a-jar on Futurama?
  • ..Compute magazine said that by the year 2000 we'd all have cassette players embedded in the walls of our houses "to store recipies and other personal files".

    Hopefully you'll understand if I take the Times' predictions with a grain of salt. :-)

  • I don't know about you, but a lot of this stuff sounds like it could give those Popular Science spots from the 50's a run for their money.

    So, just to show how easy it is to make fantastic predictions like this, I'll make one of my own:

    The Newspaper that Writes Itself

    Publishers of the NYT are already working on replacing the leagues of expensive and under-talented journalists they currently employ.

    "Really, they don't do much. I suppose we could just hire a thousand monkeys and still come up with the same quality newspaper" says Joe Owner.

    But monkeys still need food and, left alone, can produce unsanitary conditions rather quickly. The newspaper reporter of the future will require nothing more than a little electricity to write quality articles.

    Researchers are already developing electronic editors: software that searches the Internet for current events and writes commentary for the morning edition - thus freeing their human counterparts to focus more on more important matters.

    Says Rob Malda, of Slashdot, "since we installed our JonKatz, the amount of editorial effort we expend has decreased exponentially. Now, on slow news days, we just fire up Jon and instantly have something for our readers to discuss."

    However, the technology has yet to be perfected. At present, these eEditors typically produce long ramblings, usually with a largely tilted political slant. The creators of JonKatz attribute this to the significant difficulty of finding any opposing viewpoints among the programming staff.

    The journalist of the future will be a small box with a video camera and sound recording equipment. A field journalist will simply bring the box to any live event and the device will begin recording events, interviewing passersby and writing an article. Articles will be instantly available on a website and surfers will even be able to direct the virtual reporter in real-time - thus personalizing the news even more.

    <smashes his crystal ball into a thousand pieces>

    With apologies to JonKatz. Nah, nevermind... =)

  • You know, after reading this I was rather amused to note that none of this is technology people would use on a regular basis! We can create a multitude of tools today, but what use are they if nobody wants to use them? Why are there no auto-flushing toilets in residential areas like there are in offices? Hmm...alittle food for thought.

    Take the auto-driving car - this one will take alot longer than 10 years to have people start using it. Simple reason: fear. They don't want to drive something that could kill them.. and more importantly, people like control. A car that is controlled by a robot is frightening.

    Or how about the "everybody's a temp" company. As if.. anyone heard of Microsoft? That's not from the future, it's from the past.

    And then there's the phaser. Yeah.. right.. let's remember why people use guns - to KILL people. Ask any prison inmate how they can kill in a prison with no guns or metal. Until we address the issue of why people kill, every non-lethal weapon on the planet won't reduce the death count. There's a reason tasers didn't catch on - nobody wants a "useless" weapon. Yeah, that's it.. I'll just rob a bank with a non-lethal weapon.. sorry guys, but criminals aren't that stupid.

    Oh, and how about the genetic-lawn? Wonderful idea, that.. I can understand why opponents call it "frankenlawn" - we've f*cked up genetic engineering enough times already - like a certain corn crop that won't reproduce.. and its pollen makes sure every other crop in the area does the same. Real smart, that - if the corn plant blows up we'll all starve to death! w00t w00t!

  • Cool, I can regenerate into an exact replica of William Hartnell!

    Be Seeing You,

    Jeffrey.
  • Then Patrick Troughton...
  • Followed by Jon Pertwee...
  • Very freaking true.

    Writing tech stories is about the easiest thing to do in the world if you want to be lazy. (Or quite hard to be objective if you're a good reporter.)

    Recent example: The National Post ran five pages on the Microsoft breakup. One reporter, looking to get a down-to-life gritty excerpt of reaction from the streets, went to a chat room. A Yahoo! chat room. He combined the comments and rolled it into an article. The comments were worse then those found in yer standard -1 /. fare.

    "Why are they doing this? If it wasn't for Microsoft we'd still be stuck in DOS." (If you can't figure out why that's a stupid comment, go run along to barney.com.)

    "Before Microsoft you practically had to be an engineer to install programs, you had to deal with code... It was confusing."

    Umm, sorry? Microsoft came out in '85, right? So Apple / Mac was out then? Yep. And MS has always lagged behind the Mac. Running programs on Apple ][e's was the simplest thing ever: Insert disk. Turn on computer.

    Now, the oldest DOS version I've used is 5.0, but I'm guessing 2.0 and it's predecessors were evil.

    End rant: Lazy journalists. Clueless morons whose memories of "when Microsoft came on the scene" only date back to when /they/ started computing. Add it up. What do you get? A crappy article.

    Blah!
  • Well the thing is, basically transportation is being done with the most convinient method, or rather the method belived to be most convinient.

    Think back to the beginning of the last century. Almost all general personal transportation was being done using a horse.

    True there was trains for long distance and cargo, but basically everybody was riding or wagoning on a daily basis

    Allready in the early 1900 the car, the bike and the motorcycle was there, but lack of good roads and cheep veicles made them a marginal phenomena.

    Then suddenly cars became cheap and better roads was built.

    In a surprisingly short period of time allmost everybody switched from horse to car.
    This allmost imediate switch could not have been foorseen. If you look at contemporary SF, they fantasized of flying / hoovering transportation. Hardly any SF writer anticipated the explotion of the car.

    This shows that we are rather restricted in our imagination by what we have today.
    So I would guess that whatever the next default individual transport method will be, propably it is allready here, but we just fail to realize that this one is the next big thing.

    Just as today we really can't see the car going away, the rider of 1900 wouldn't dream of replacing his horse. But still the car replaced the horse in a (historically seen) surprisingly short time.

    No level of car-nostalgia will prevent it from going away once there is a option that is belived to be better. Of cource it propably wont go a way 100%, but it will stop being regarded as the default individual transportation icon.

    Problem is. this kind of quantum-leaps in personal preferences is not really predictable, so anybody saying that he can show us the car-killer should be taken with more than a grain of salt
  • I don't own a car. I never have, and never wanted to. All my life, I've always taken the bus from one place to another (not to mention my trusty bike, which would be just fine if it weren't for the fact that bike-riding in the streets of Rio is practically suicidal). Sure, it's slow. Sure, it's mildly dangerous. Sure, it's a R$0.90 fare (and it's gone up 50% from R$0.60 in one year and a half, this when Brazil is practically in a deflation period).

    But I prefer taking the bus than paying for an overpriced (yes, cars here are ridiculously expensive, for no good reason), dangerous (you are safer in a bus or in a plane than in a car), bulky car which I'll have to ride through Brazil's ridiculously hole-filled streets. (Import cars suffer most from this: everyone I know who owns one is constantly having to pay top R$ to get their car fixed.)

    Brazilians are wholly and completely obsessed with cars. Maybe the whole world is. Me, I hate them. A future without public transportation isn't a future for me.

  • Those phaser thingies would make paint-balling much more fun.

    Mahahahahahaaaaaa. >:-)

    Seriously though, it would be great for law enforcement; no more having to worry (too much) about hitting innocent civilians, provided that it doesn't hurt too much.
  • In a surprisingly short period of time allmost everybody switched from horse to car.

    ... with a caveat. Let me take you for a ride.

    We start at downtown Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. (Next to the Municipal Theatre and the National Library.) It's about as urban as an urban area can get. Constant traffic jams, a shitload of cars and busses.

    So we leave the downtown area; less than 20 kilometers away, we're already headed towards the suburbs of the Baixada Fluminense. This is an area which mixes industries (an oil refinery in Duque de Caxias, for instance) and residential and commercial areas for the lower and middle-lower classes, many of whom go daily to Rio de Janeiro to work. We still see mostly old cars and busses, but the sight of equine transportation isn't really unusual anymore.

    A few dozen kilometers further, we're in the Rio-Teresópolis highway. This is already a rural area; streets (some asphalted, some not) connect the highway to the nearby villages. These are decent places to live, more or less - we're not talking about the "middle of nowhere"; it's less than 100 miles away from Rio de Janeiro, the second most important city in Brazil. Yet it's already more common to see people going around by horse than by car.

    You see, it turns out that a lot of people are still using horses. I'm not saying it's a good thing; I'm pointing out that it's there, it's real... and it's not in any way less relevant just because it's in the Third World.

Slashdot Top Deals

Business is a good game -- lots of competition and minimum of rules. You keep score with money. -- Nolan Bushnell, founder of Atari

Close