What Will The World Be Like In The Year 2050?

Problem thinking is a huge part of being intelligent. The more neural networks you make the more dead ends going nowhere or just circles.

 

i don't see a linear progression in a positive direction. but i do see a positive progression, after a major pain, that is the price of ignornace and indifference now.
its still variable, how deep the pain, how much we smarten up now to avoid, there are so many social factors.
the planet itself, will almost certainly be fine, but human society, whether there will even be humans to have human society.

1980 to now, yes that would be reasonable to expect, if it weren't for there also being natural limits that we're already smacking our own faces up against.
its that that's why all bets are off.

 

2050 is the year my driver license expires. and I choose E. and L.

 

The population is expected to increase from a current estimate of 6.9 billion to 9.5 billion so I’d guess mass starvation


Hotwater

 

The young whipper snappers just wont get it in 2050

 

http://youtu.be/9IKVj4l5GU4

 

It's currently 7.3 billion. When I was born it was about 3.2 billion. 35 years ago it was about 4.5 billion.

 

[SIZE=medium]What we need is a good ole’ fashioned global pandemic [/SIZE]


[SIZE=medium]Hotwater[/SIZE]

 

the worst thing that coukd happen is the extinction of the [human] species. thats highly unlikely though, its far morely likely that there will be surviving few, in that case human society might be set back into the stone age again and basically have to start over from scratch. it would depend on which people haopened to be the survivors, how many of them ... how smart they were and what their values were as for how far exactly they would regress. the larger the group of survivors the better off we'd be .. i wont explain why because it would be a trmendously long post, i have some faith in the intelligence of the people reading this

if this happend there would be a big jump in evolution ... it would depend on who survived though, and why they survived as to what the outcome would be. if intellect was a favorable trait then i'd say in 10,000 more years theyd make it far further than we are now, despite having to "start over".

humans used stone tools for some 200,000 years with hardly any difference in "technology" from one generation to the next. i wonder what the catalyst was that set off the phenomenon we see today where technology increases in technology as an almost exponential-like rate?

 

A stable climate.

The rise of human civilization coincides with the most relatively stable climate since human beings have come into existence.

And the stable climate could very likely come to an end by the beginning of the next century.

 

care to elaborate?

it seems that climate change forces selection pressure in an ecosystem. "it is not the strongest of the species that survives ... but the ones which best adapts to change," ... or something like thaf, Charles Darwin said it.

change is what drives evolution.

 

World war 1

 

much progress is made in war. its the classic "arms race"" scenario. There are certainly other scenarios which resemble this ... the cheetah gets faster as the gazelle it chases gets faster ... typical arms race scenario, both sides are set to improve.

 

Yes, change forces selection pressure in an ecosystem... but the problem with current climate change is that the change is happening so rapidly that there's no time to adapt, which is part of the reason why we are in the middle of mass-extinction event.

During the glacial period, rapid climate changes occurred on a regular basis... which would have made agriculture difficult. Humans would have adapted to unreliable climate conditions by living in hunter-gatherer societies. Since agriculture is the foundation of human civilization, civilization couldn't arise.

Why civilization didn't arise during the Eemian interglacial is a mystery.

 

The start of world war 1 caused lots of things to happen.

 

And look at the technological advances that have happened since then. We are just over the 100 year anniversary

 

technology continues to advance toward magic. culture continues to decline toward barbarism. it doesn't that a college degree to do the math.

at some point, the decline of civilization will interfere, temporarily, with the advancement of technology. this could last for little more then a decade, or nearly as long as a millinium, as happened in the middle ages.

today, many who have the power of fortune, seem hell bent on reinstituting a kind of technologically advanced, government imposed, feudalism.

this is not the fault of technology nor government as such, but the short sightedness of greed, and its near complete usurpation of the latter.

all the while forgetting, greed and to a degree populism as well, that nature has a say, possibly a final say in all of this. its limits are not an illusion. however tempting it is to greed, to pretend that they are.

so yes, there is this collision course that we are on, and it is very real. it is never too late to change course, but it is already too late to avoid all damage.

what remains to be seen is how much damage we can or will avoid. we can still avoid a great deal of it. but will we? that i cannot say. that is up to the defacto of consensus.

and that i am not so bold as to posses any great confidence to predict.

what i do have complete confidence in, is that the limitations of and imposed by nature, the carrying capacity of the natural environment, its capacity to maintain the conditions that make possible our own existence, are completely and entirely real.

 

no. it was the renaissance. that is to say, the beginning of the release from the iron hand of fanaticism, that had forbade honest and rational scientific thought.

and that in turn, had been sparked by conflict between otherwise remarkably similar forms of religious though. the rise of islamic culture resurecting the life of what has come to be called moorish spain.

that was the beginning of the end of popular acceptance of feudalism as being sacred or 'god willed'. and it was the ending of that, which has made all else possible since.

but again, now we are facing, those with power and influence, for their own short sighted gain, possibly not even seeing it, though i'm sure many do, a reinstituting, of feudal dominance.

(oh yes, this is also dressed up and hidden behind the apron strings of 'christian' AND 'islamic' religious thought. just as it had been behind 'christian' thought, in the middle ages.
there is, another iteration of religious thought beyond that of islam, and will continue to be yet a fresher one, ever thousand years.)

also i like that idea, about our removing ourselves mostly from the stage, accelerating the evolution of what remains. i see this as one possible window, for the birth of 'furry sapience', to out shine and out compete, our own pitiful remnant. perhaps they will prove more kind then we have been. perhaps not.

i see the greatest likelihood that there will be some remnant of ourselves, and that we will rebuild some things. too small a remnant to mine coal and uranium and oil, but possibly smart enough to rebuild water wheels, windmills, solar cells, and little people sized trains that run off of stored energy, charged by solar, and clean grid technologies.

but will anything THAT dramatic happen that soon? evolution, even vastly accelerated, takes at least thousands of years, not hundreds, but population implosion from famine and disease, could take as little as a decade and change. so we could be that straggling few, as early as 2050, or more likely still be in the process of dying off.

but for that straggling few, once the dying off has begun to pass, such a world, today's world, with a tiny fraction of today's population, yes, that would certainly be some kind of paradise. at least it certainly would be to me.

 

I dont have to live that long. To see the year 2040 is enough for me, this is when I'll be 50.

 

its not that predictable to pin down exactly when, or even completely what. though famine and a multiplying of diversity of deadly diseases are not unlikely.
i'm 66 now, and my body is making me doubt i'll even see as much as another decade.

but i believe in my previous life, i deliberately had myself born into this one, because i did care what happened. even if all i could actually do, would be to observe.

humanity is facing one of those make or break transitions, that nearly every world, every sapient population of every world that has one, faces at some similar point.

that is why people from other worlds wish to observe us. and to do so without interfering with our own decision making process. and why they are forbidden to allow it to become obvious they are watching. if it should happen to be that they are.

whatever happens, it is always interesting to see.

the only way anyone is likely to be dead as young as 50, is from misadventure, or something like what presently seems to be inevitable, will have already caught up with them.
or perhaps they were born with some condition that prematurely dooms them.

my wife did die at the age of 59, from c.o.p.d. i never saw her drink alky, nor have it in the house, but she was diagnosed with liver problems, and she smoked like a chimny.