ABOUT COSMIC LOG

Quantum fluctuations in space, science, exploration and other cosmic fields... served up regularly by MSNBC.com science editor Alan Boyle since 2002.

Alan Boyle covers the physical sciences, anthropology, technological innovation and space science and exploration for MSNBC.com. He is a winner of the AAAS Science Journalism Award, the NASW Science-in-Society Award and other honors; a contributor to "A Field Guide for Science Writers"; and a member of the board of the Council for the Advancement of Science Writing.

Check out Boyle's biography or send a message to Cosmic Log via cosmiclog@msnbc.com.



The world in 2058

Posted: Friday, April 18, 2008 1:05 PM by Alan Boyle


Masumi Yajima / Univ. of Calgary / AFP file
A researcher checks a 3-D model of the human body, projected from the walls and floor of a virtual-reality room at the University of Calgary. Such
blends of medical and cybernetic innovation are likely to become more
widespread in the next 50 years. Click on the image for a larger version.

How will the world look in the year 2058? Sixty thinkers from around the world rise to that challenge in "The Way We Will Be 50 Years From Today," a collection of essays edited by longtime journalist Mike Wallace.

The consensus view is that we'll muddle through many of the issues that vex us today - including climate change and terror threats. And we'll hit upon so many medical and technological wonders that today's 50-year-olds will have a fair chance of finding out firsthand how the world will look in 2058.

The problem with having so many predictions of the future is that they can look like a collection of to-do lists: The most popular item on the checklist would be getting your complete genetic code analyzed, so that the doctors can give you custom-made medications for what ails you (or what might have ailed you without the drugs). And don't forget the cyber-implants: Several essayists, including inventor-futurist Ray Kurzweil, heralded the day when nanomachines would merge with our own bodies.

In addition to those well-traveled themes, "50 Years From Today" is jam-packed with nuggets of less conventional wisdom from experts in fields ranging from bioethics to counterterrorism. Here are a few examples:

  • Diseases ranging from Alzheimer's and Parkinson's to schizophrenia and bipolar disorder will be shown to be caused by infectious agents that take advantage of genetic predisposition, says psychiatrist E. Fuller Torrey, president of the Treatment Advocacy Center. Researchers will be surprised to find that many of those infectious agents are being transmitted from animals to humans. As a result, it will be uncommon to keep cats, birds or hamsters as pets - but we'll still have dogs around, because they've been "man's best friend" for so long that we've already adjusted to their infectious agents.

  • International terrorism will be brought under control because governments will realize counterterrorism is primarily a police function rather than a job for the military, says Ronald Noble, the secretary-general of Interpol. Passports and IDs will be linked to a global monitoring system, much as credit cards are today. "People will no longer be able to travel and engage in transactions with anonymity," thanks to surveillance and biometrics, he says. All this will pose "thorny issues" for a post-privacy era.

  • Several essayists said water will become as big a resource issue as petroleum is today. "We cannot go green without thinking blue," former White House chief of staff Leon Panetta and former Energy Secretary James Watkins say. Norman Borlaug, father of the "Green Revolution" in agriculture, says there will have to be a "Blue Revolution" to provide enough water for the planet's burgeoning population. Thus, cleaning up the oceans and providing fresh water should rank right up there with controlling greenhouse gases.

  • The outlook for longer life spans is a mixed bag: Kurzweil says the pace of life extension will outrun the passage of years, offering at least the possibility of an indeterminate life span 50 years from now. But trends also point to a decline in average life expectancy, due to the increased incidence of obesity among today's young people, says Wanda Jones, director of the Office on Women's Health at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Pros and cons for longer life
Arthur Caplan, a columnist for msnbc.com and director of the University of Pennsylvania's Center for Bioethics, takes something of a middle road: In his essay, written from the point of view of his grandchild, he foresees a world where people can look forward to 140 years of high-quality life. (In a comic twist, the essay also bemoans Caplan's death, "frail and decrepit," at the young age of 80.) 

Caplan, who is 58, told me he bases his prediction on the promise of regenerative medicine, as well as a better understanding of how lifestyle and genetics affect health. All these new technologies will raise new ethical issues, he acknowledged - for example, whether future generations will be genetically modified to fix defects and even introduce enhancements.

"People will have to think harder about whether they want to have kids the old-fashioned way," he said. "Why would you choose to take a random chance, knowing that your child would have a chance of having a defect but going ahead anyway? You start to get into blame and guilt about disability in a way that we don't really do now."

Greater longevity will also have social implications, he said. "You're not going to just have people living till 140 without changing your ideas about retirement, career, education, leisure, marriage, childrearing - also, even eligibility for social benefits. My hunch is that you're going to have to tack on a few more years before you get that senior discount card."

We should all have such problems, right?

The bad, the good and the ugly
In his essay, theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss sorts through the "bad, the good and the ugly." For Krauss, the "bad" issues that have to be dealt with focus on climate change, energy shortages and nuclear weapons - and the "good" technologies ahead include medical breakthroughs, computer intelligence and virtual reality.

Dealing with the bad and taking advantage of the good will depend on whether society can bring an end to today's "ugly" struggle between science and religion, Krauss said. That observation is particularly apt for a week in which this year's presidential candidates passed up an opportunity to attend Science Debate 2008 - and in which a new movie titled "Expelled" renews the creationism-vs.-evolution argument.

"If we allow nonsense to be purveyed with impunity, then I think it feeds down - it's a slippery slope," Krauss told me. "We can't honestly address the serious problems we're going to face in the next 50 years until we're willing to accept the world the way it really is, without fear."

The next-to-the-last word
In "50 Years From Now," the first essayist to have his say is Vint Cerf, who was one of the founding fathers of the Internet almost 40 years ago. Today, he's vice president and chief Internet evangelist at Google, and one of the world's most widely consulted technological seers. He'll get the next-to-the-last word here.

Cerf foresees a world in which the infrastructure used today for transporting oil has been replaced by water tankers and water pipelines. The energy for a global electrical grid is provided by solar, wind and nuclear plants. Outposts are taking root on Mars and Titan, knit together by an Interplanetary Internet. And discoveries about the Higgs field and the nature of mass, pioneered by the Large Hadron Collider, are raising the possibility of inertialess travel at the speed of light.

Here's the e-mail exchange I had with Cerf this week, while he was traveling in Spain:

Q: A lot of the essays in the book, yours included, refer to the global warming / energy issue but imply that the problems have been overcome without putting a crimp in technological development. Why is your projection of life 50 years from now so optimistic on the rising technological trend line?

Vinton Cerf: I am an optimist by nature and believe strongly that technology can be brought to bear to create alternatives, even in crisis situations.

I just spent a half-day at the Bletchley Park museum near London. As you will recall, it was at Bletchley Park that a remarkable and diverse group of Britons produced some of the most critical intelligence of World War II through the use of the Bombe and Colossus special-purpose computers. They created alternatives where there were none before, as did the Americans with the Manhattan Project. I believe that the problem of global climate change will ultimately spur our global society to respond and while the condition does not appear to be reversible, we will find ways to adapt to it.

That there will be many negative side effects is not in dispute. Ways of life will change and in some cases degrade, but I believe that we will find ways to adapt. We may find that we have to move into underwater habitats. We will need to invest massively in more environmentally responsible energy production. And the world's ecological and economic systems will almost certainly change, too. But we will survive.

Q: I'm interested in your reference to the Higgs field and potential implications for new technologies, obviously because of the imminent startup of the Large Hadron Collider. You mention the E.E. Smith inertialess drive, which is really quite intriguing - that's something I hadn't heard before in reference to the LHC. Could you expand a bit on how understanding the theoretical underpinnings of inertial mass might lead to propulsion technologies (even in hand-waving terms)?

A: I am only a layman in this area, but it is my understanding that the Higgs field is what imbues other atomic particles with mass and that the Higgs boson is the particle that delivers the force of the field. If we had a way to manipulate the Higgs field, we might be able to establish inertialess conditions that could overcome Einstein's fundamental speed limitations.

Q: Could you provide a brief update on the Interplanetary Internet project?

A: The project is in its 10th year and it is now planned to carry out tests of the Interplanetary Protocols using the Deep Impact spacecraft that launched a probe into Comet Tempel 1 in October 2006. The spacecraft is still operational, and the plan is to upload the Delay Tolerant Networking protocols onto the onboard computer. NASA has given the project permission to test these protocols from Earth. A successful test will qualify the protocol for future deployments on production space missions. We also hope to carry out demonstrations and tests on board the international space station.

Q: Any thoughts on Ray Kurzweil's singularity? I'm not sure if you've seen his essay in the book, but it makes clear he thinks that the machines we build 50 years from now will be ... us. In your estimation, will artificial implants and enhancements have a significant impact on how we think of ourselves in 2058, or will it not be that big of a deal?

A: I continue to worry about the potential to upload ourselves into a silicon analog. I think Kurzweil could be right about the relative intelligence of the computers of the distant future, but a machine intelligence may not be commensurate with instantiation of a biological intelligence within the silicon version. However, I do agree that artificial implants will provide us with supranormal capabilities that are presently inaccessible to most humans today.

Q: I like the idea that trying to explain the new jobs of the future would be as difficult as trying to explain what a Webmaster does to the man in the 1950s gray flannel suit. Nevertheless, do you have any thoughts on what any of those jobs might be, even in very general terms? (E.g., virtual-worldmaster...)

A: I can imagine people actually working in virtual environments where productive, cooperative work is undertaken, and I think we will find people helping others to take advantage of masses of information that are inaccessible or too vast to process in real time today. With billions of Internet-enabled devices or at least programmable devices on the network, there seems to be ample room for new services that manage these devices to be developed. "Hi, I'm your virtual entertainment manager! What movies would you like to watch next week?"

Q: Do you think imagining the future, as you and your colleagues have done in this book, will help shape that future - or do you see this exercise as merely a fun, readable exercise of the imagination?

A: I think imaginative exercises can have a profound impact on the future - what you can imagine can sometimes turn into something you can figure out how to build. I hope that reading these essays, there will be a few young people who will realize some of the speculative ideas or discover more interesting ones of their own.

I said that Cerf would have the next-to-the-last word - and that's because, as always, it's you who have the last word. Feel free to pass along your predictions about the world in 2058 as comments below. If we can carry these electronic bits from one generation of the Internet to the next, there's a good chance we'll be able to find out who came closest to the truth.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

The remote operation enabled by the medical imaging would make astronauts much more comfortable to go on space missions (to the moon at least) with proven technology such as this to help them. It seems like it would be difficult at Mars, however. Can you imagine having surgery with the doctor having lag?
Mostly this sort of speculation is just for fun. We should be mindful of how far off the predictions of 50 years ago were. But Vint Cerf's comment about influencing the next generation has some validity. I remember when I got my first StarTAC flip phone from Motorola. The resemblance to a Star Trek communicator was obvious - and no coincidence, I'm sure. Many of us engineers grew up watching Star Trek and so we knew what a communicator is supposed to look like.
1. I don't like the idea of a world wide recording system of all humans that will know where each are at any second of the day. Big Sister. How can we get away from our wives for a fews minutes peace?
2. I've been trying to get that damn cat, hamster and bird out of the house for 8 years now.
3. If I live to be 140 there better be something to alleviate the bad knees, sore muscles, overextended back, and stiff neck I've had from physical work all my life.
4. Phyical work - Unless I misunderstand his comments, Mr. Cerf - "I can imagine people actually working in virtual environments where productive, cooperative work is undertaken, and I think we will find people helping others to take advantage of masses of information that are inaccessible or too vast to process in real time today" - is talking office or managerial personnel.  Who will turn the hamburgers, build the homes, fix your car, manufacture your computer parts?  A virtual worker?
5. Being optimistically a pessimist with the World's population doubled in the next 50 years, where are we going to put all the extra people and still have room to explore an area not seen by human eyes for many years or at least since the last time you were there, get away from the wife, find a nice clean lake to swim or go fishing in?  Virtual nature.  BassFisherman on Xbox.
6. Water will be the next oil for sure.  Instead of finding how to clean our water today to be ready for tomorrow, we will be fighting over how to drain the Great Lakes for use in Mr. Cerf's corner of California and the other western states.  We will literaly defend it!   ABSOLUT'
7. I am thinking these fellas are talking strictly about their own special interest projects and if the "to do" list is only that then nothing will work without the rest of "us" included.  As Humans we want to be involved, but we don't want to be told what it is we will be doing 50 years from now.  We can actually do something good in the next 50 years, but it won't be a concerted effort by anyone (Maybe NASA).  It will be the entrepreneurs that will do most of it.  We will still have the same problems we have today.  You will not change human nature.  
8.  We should have some type of colony on the moon by then and/or sometype of intersteller ship being built on the ISS by then.  
A few years ago I had an Aunt die from cancer. It was believed to be a result of years of drinking a diet soda, one which used a artificial sweetener. I don't believe any wonderful advancements in diagnostics medicine will change anything until we eliminate causes of disease such as preservatives, and artificial sweeteners and colors. Zoo animals have a more healthy diet and environment than most children and teenagers. There must be some way to stop the billions in profit being made from the sale of FDA approved additives. You want to see pollution eliminated from the environment start with are food.
I think we pretty much will all be dead by 2058.
Wait until you see the real world version of a Holodeck!
Sigh.

50 years from now, things will look much the same as they do today.

It's all well and fine to envision better medical imaging, new genetically tailored drugs, and alternative energy, but the fact is that buy-in from Big Business is required for any of that.

News flash - corporations tend not to undertake such initiatives unless there is profit involved.  Corporations loathe change, because change increases risk, and risk costs money.  You can count on some innovation, sure, but only if some executive somewhere can figure out how to profit by it.  Don't count on breakthrough level, make-the-world-a-better-place innovation, just for the sake of making the world a better place.

So could we have 3-D imaging technology?  Sure, and a body scan can end up costing more than a simple MRI.  Can we have genetically tailored drugs?  Yes, at an enormously higher cost than generic manufactured drugs.  Alternatives to oil?  Not on a large scale, unless we're willing to pay more than we pay for oil.  And we're not.

It's simple economics.
This article seems to blow right past the immense strain 140-year lifespans would place upon both national economies and the planet itself.
The biggest issue is south to north migraration.  America and Europe will not have majority white populations and will be much more over populated.
Greg,

How can you say that? Look at the changes in technology that our parents and grandparents have seen in 50 years. Do you think they'll say it's the same as it was?  

It's a certainty that money talks but it's also a certainty that innovations in the next 10 years will be greater than the last 10 years.

I'll admit that I'm an also an optimist, but I can't wait to see what's in store for my kids or my grandkids (or great-great grandkids if half of this story comes true).
The next fifty years are critical to the survival of the species. While it's encouraging to hear that there are optimists in the futurist crowd, the reality is we have over a dozen major issues to overcome. A partial list includes the biggies like: global warming, air quality, an alternative renewable energy source, fresh water, overpopulation, and an adequate food supply. But there are other not so well known issues such as erosion of top soil, and a decrease in biodiversity that could lead to a massive breakdown in the food chain. Soylent Green anyone?

If we solve most of these major problems but are still faced with one or two it's still game over for civilization as we know it.

We can adapt, we can be innovative, but can nations work together to solve the problems facing the human race? For my 10 year old daughter's sake I hope so.
No way will the world of 2058 look the same as today - just compare the world of 1958 with the world of today.  Profit comes from new products - "Mature" technologies don't throw off the same level of return.  What we can't envision is what new things might be invented.  Some we can predict, but most we can't simply because no precursor exists today.
This guy is an idiot.   Higgs field technology to exceed the speed of light?   Moving to underwater habitats?  He's been reading too many comic books.

No, we're looking at a world currently over 6 billion people, quickly heading to 10 billion.  With oil running out, the unabated burning of fossil fuels, and the non-stop clearing of wetlands, jungles, and forests, global warming is in free fall.  Farmable land all over the globe is being lost to climate change already.   Bottom line is that in an era of competition for resources and hugely increased demand, we are looking at an extended period of global unrest. Wars always result in times of resourse shortage throughout history.

Outposts on Mars and Titan?   We went to the moon 30 years ago, couldn't go back now if we wanted to.  Optimistically, a manned-return to the moon os at least 15 years away.  Forget about Mars.  There is no one alive on the planet today who will witness a manned Mars expedition.

Until we scale back the global population to something sustainable with a new global climate and resourse model, we will be looking at decades of social upheaval.   Not some technological Utopia crap.
We've been fortunate up to this point that we haven't had a truly destructive super-virus hit in modern times. We've had easily transferrable viruses (colds/flu) and viruses that are extremely harmful (anything greater than about 20% fatality would wreak havoc on the entire world); what happens when we get a virus that is both airborne and deadly? Or a bacteria that’s resistant to all drugs that currently exist or can quickly be produced?

My guess is that over population will be solved the old fashioned way, naturally.
For an idea of what the world will look like in 50 years, just look back 50 years, or even 500 years for a clearer view. Regardless of technological breakthroughs and quantum leaps in medicine, mankind's base desires and needs have never changed since the beginning of mankind, and the human condition will only continue to worsen for the masses. While the few at the top will live long lives artificially supported by their medications and biometric inventions, the majority of the world's population will sink into sickness (disease) and starvation. Some call this survival of the fittest or natural selection, but the faithful recognize it as prophecy and by simply looking back in time, one can see that things are not getting better and they never have. Sure, this was a fun read but fantasy always is.
Has anyone seen "Children of Men"?  That is the perfect example of what life will be like in the future.  Some technological and medical advances, but also, a world contaminated with pollution.
I think its kinda ridiculous that the biggest elephant in the room (religion) had like 3 sentences in this article. I see no bigger hurdle than overcoming the obstacles and sheer ignorance that faith poses on mankind's welfare and future state. 50 years from now, are you kidding me? Something like 50% of the U.S.'s population believe that jesus will return to earth in the next 50 years. It's a startling and scary statistic but how can we get people to care about the future of our planet when the majority of population believe this life is all just a transitional phase? Scary
I will respectfully have to disagree with a few of my fellow readers.  I am a computer engineer by trade.  Just within the short 25 years of my professional career, I have seen miracles happen and the technology is still in it's infancy.  When I first started everyone was a generalist around the IT shop.  It was pretty much possible for you to know most of what you needed to know to handle everything from communications to that new fangled thing called a computer.  But now . . . forget it!!!!  It's all I can do just to stay on top of the newest trends in Microsoft Internet development.  Technology is moving extremely fast and it's accelerating.  

A few other things I disagree with:
1. Companies LOVE to take risks on projects that may turn out to be the next great thing and this will never change because it is driven by greed. Hello!!  Anyone remember the DOTNET Bubble back in 2000-2001.  There is an example of Risk investment gone out of control and beyond all reason.
2.  Technology tends to drive down costs over the long-run.  Sure anything brand spanking new will be more expensive but what is brand new today is old hat next year and it is cheaper as a result.  heck we see this happen all the time.  How many of us "normal" people could afford to buy a plasma television when they first came out.  But now, heck you'll be hard pressed to find a new tube television and why would you want to anyway when you can get a High def Plasma for the same or less.

Will technology make the world a better place - I don't know but I can say this for sure.  In 50 years, the world will NOT resemble the one we currently live in.  My educated opinion.  Take it for what it's worth.
How is fresh water possibly a problem in the future?  With desalinization and water treatment technologies we would have to be brain dead for this to be a problem.  Dig a 150 acre, 40 foot deep lake in Indiana and fill it from the Great Lakes.  A 200 acre one in GA and fill it from the Atlantic, and a 300 acre one for NV from the Pacific. How is this hard.  Matter can neither be created or destroyed only changed.  There is as much water today as the day the world was created.  If we ever have a problem with fresh water we SHOULD die because we don't deserve to go on as a species if we can't figure this one out.  Everyone is worried about flooding from glacial melting.  This will also alleviate that.  Two birds with one stone.  
Ernest, Get a life. Your Aunt didn't die of an artificial sweetner. I'm sure your talking about aspartame. Check your facts. The only reason there was ever a stink raised about aspartame was because the stock holders of saccharin (Sweet 'N' Low), saw the price of their stock tumble. Many of these stockholders were the doctors & researches who came out against Nutra Sweet. Follow the money whenever you "hear" about how bad something is for you & do some independant research before you open your mouth. Same thing goes for all the "Man Made Global Warming" nut jobs out there. Do you honestly think people & companies are not getting rich off this fraud? Look who's making the money!! News orginizations, researchers, environmental scientists, colleges & universities, talk shows, politicians, etc. etc. etc. You name it & people are benefitting for the hysteria. The biggest hypocrate of all is Al Gore. Once his lie of inventing the internet was outed & he legitemately lost the presidential election he had to come up with another scam to stay in the lime light. What better way than to make a movie showing how he doesn't care so much for himself, it's the world he cares about. Give me a break. His movie has already been shown for the fanasy it really is. It just doesn't get spread around because the people who are crying wolf won't get rich. What country is being impacted the most by this. The U.S. Most of the rest of the world will be minimally imacted by any regulations. That's why the rest of the world is backing Gore & even awarding him a Nobel prize (never again will that award be meaningful). The rest of the world is chuckeling with glee at bringing the U.S. down to their level. And just so you idiotic environmentalists & liberals don't attribute my tirade to being conservative, the main reason the rest of the worl is so glad to see this country in the finacial mess it's in is because they see us as the cocky bullies that we really are. Instead of truly helping other countries we bully them into accepting & adopting our way of life & government or they will not receiveaid from us. The next 50 years stand a real good chance of seeing this country become almost "3rd world" in relation to the rest of the developed nations unless we learn to respect other nations that don't think like we do.
Question on global warnming.  I live in a southeastern state.  I was taught in school and through the discovery channel that in the dinosaur days my state was a lush rain forrest with vast quantities of flora and fauna.  Then whatever extinction event (take your pick of theory) happened brought in the ice age and changed it to the temperate climate of today.  If this is true, would that not mean that the warming that is occuring today is just the Earth returning to its normal state before the catastrophic event that caused the ice age?  So this means either scientist are misleading us about the cause of global warming or about what the world was like in prehistoric times.  They need to fess up to one of the two untruths because you can't have it both ways.  
True enough my friend, there is as much water today as there ever was and some would tell you that there is more because it falls on us from space . .  BUT . . . the question is how much potable water will we have to meet the needs of an ever increasing population.  I don't just mean drinking water but water to irrigate crops, sanitary water to bath with, to cook with, to brush teeth with, for manufacturing, etc, etc, etc.  True enough, desalinization is a possible option to meet some of the need but it is currently an expensive and inefficient process that cannot without further technological advancement, meet the greater need.

Water will soon become a major problem for us all.
My humble opinion.
if u wanna know the truth, we all are probably gonna have our anti christ by than.. think im stupid?.. remind me of it when the day comes..soon..
One thing for certain, is that we as human beings must adapt not only to the social, medical, and industrial problems of today and the future or the possibility that other species on planetary tours will identify us as the late great planet earth. Now a dead planet!
Fear!  Isn't it a wonderful way to manage the sheep.
1984
KVG...That was pretty funny, but I have to agree with your tirade. The world always wants to see the big bully go down. It's almost human nature. History does repeat itself! Has anyone visited the Roman Empire lately?
Disco will still SUCK!
Alabama.....the last ice age (there have been many) was about 20,000 years ago.   The dinosaurs lived 65 million years ago.   At that time, the land that is now Alabama, and all of the present continents, were in some other part of the world (ever hear about plate tectonics?)  Climate comparisons from that era are irrelevant to today's issues.

Man made global warming?   What difference does it make whether its man made or natural?  In either case, the disastrous effects on civilization are the same.   And the steps we need to take to limit man's arguable contribution are positive regardless of the cause.
To Alabama,

The last Ice Age ended about 11,000 years ago.  The Earth's temperatures stabilized long ago.  One of the tenets that supports the Global warming theory is that temperatures began noticably rising not long after the Industrial Revolution.  The temperatures increased slowly at first but over the last decade the increases have have been dramatic.  There is compeling evidence to suggest that the teperature increases that we are seeing are man-made.  But hey, ya know what . . . It doesn't matter who is to blame because it's already happened.  All we can hope to do at this point is figure out a way to adapt and I believe we will once every stops bickering and begins to address the issue honestly.  I hate politics!

Once again, my educated opinion.
. . . . And you know what else . . .  who never know what might happen.  Heck, one big volcanic eruption or two could put enough dust in the air to lower the global temperatures enough to make things bearable (for a little while anyway).  There are several out there rumbling around right now.  If the cauldera in Yellowstone ever blows we might even see another ice age (at least those of us who survive it).  Oh they just did have a major mid-western earthquake didn't they . . . . hmmmm.

My point is that if you really want to worry, you can worry just about anything.  Don't worry about things.  Take action!

My musings.
How many people currently living, of the 6.5 Billion, want to live in a world where the population potentially has reach 9.5 to 10 Billion individuals.  Have food shortages been eradicated in Africa?  Has human disease, increase or decreased in the last 50 years-why are so many individuals worried about human-to-human transmission of bird-flu?  

Fresh water?  With all the people living today, there isn't enought fresh water to support daily living in some countries.  Our rivers are polluted from farming activities, hormones from human birth control are causing health and changes of sexuality in many inland fish species.  Pipelines--Oh that is a good one--let's just build a pipeline from Greenland's Glaciers down the coast of Canada into the East Coast and across the Midwest down to Mexico City.  (Looks like a Borg's interpertation of Earth out of Star Trek various movies).  

With the Global Warming, several low lying regions in North Africa would flood, forming inland seas.  This might be great for Egypt, and the Quatara Depression or in the Bodilee Depression--they could raise shrimp and then sell that to the Chinese to feed Asia.  Also, has anyone actually seen how the interior of Brazil would flood?  The Amazon River Basin, too, is a low lying depression that would be under 20-40 feet of water--major species of animals, reptiles, aves, and tropical flora would become extinct due to Global Warming.  

The only thing interesting is the possibility of humans moving off-world and begining to terraform Mars.  When will one of these European/Russian/Indian/Chineses countries actually harvest and send large seed/grain/nuts to Mars or introduce bacterial life from Earth to start the terra forming process.  Gliders flying over Mars, dispersing various grass, flowers, and herbal seeds.  Pods, crashing into the Martian soil, dispersing Maple, Oaks, Walnuts, Hazlenut, or various species of Pine seeds into the Martian environment to get trees growing on the surface.  

While it would be wonderful to think about the great possibilities of the next 50 years, remember that even in Star Trek, the Third World War, occurred with a Nuclear exchange between the countries.  

The Ecosystem had been destroyed, small populations of humanity were living in isolation in mountainous regions of the world.  

In the "Star Trek Universe", the "Vulcans existed" and brought stability to the human populations.  

This is reality, unfortunately there are no "Vulcans"--and the probability of the Earth being destroyed by the 9.5 Billion individuals of 2058 feeding on each other.  

Can anyone Say "Jeffery Dahmer" was "Hungry", eat some Mexican, eat some Asian, eat some Italian...

Get the point...law abiding citizens dont think about owning a gun.  But the criminals already have guns.  

Go ahead, have babies--they are tasty and the meat is very tender with Barbecue Sauce.  

Bake a Fat Person, plop an apple in their mouth and slice them up like a Thanksgiving Ham!!  Yummy.  

Find a slim person, turn them into a "Slim Jim" or a "Beef Jerky" strip and hang them up in the cellar for a long winter's night.  
Does anyone realize we are not going to be on this planet past the year 2012?  Do you not watch the History Channel?  Have you not seen what has been said?  Do you not see what is going on today in this world?  We ARE in the stages of Armageddon, and there's no turning back.  Quit worrying about the future and live your life now!  You don't have too much time left.
I think it's unlikely that advanced technologies will provide satisfactory answers to basic human problems. In addition, extending the average human lifespan may not be a good thing. Frankly, if I had to wait until I was 90 or 100 to retire, I'd probably shoot myself.
There is a fact many seem to be ignoring: Most predictions of the future, optimistic or pessimistic, are nothing more than linear extrapolations of the present, which is why they are almost always wrong in both form and content.  The breathless utopian visions of the 1950s were just suburban American triumphalism expressing itself; likewise, the dystopian visions of today, like the dystopias of early proto-SF, are nothing more than expressions of contemporary fear.  

While this fact works both ways, I personally find the pessimist side of the equation far more annoying and ridiculous.  Those so enthralled to fear, and so lacking in imagination that they believe the problems of their own era are the final, insurmountable obstacles that will end or cripple mankind, contribute nothing by their predictions.  

Another thing I find obnoxious about the pessimist case is the frequent citing of "human nature" as proof  of our downward trajectory - as if human nature consists only in that small handful of emergent behaviors that *could*, if nothing else is taken into account, result in human extinction.  Our nature is how all of this came about in the first place - how we became sentient and communicative; how we learn and grow; how we solve problems and seek knowledge; how we care about each other.  To deny or belittle those aspects of human nature is to ignore reality, and doing so is the only way to justify the bleaker scenarios - many of which seem to depend entirely on the idea that people will do little or nothing to save themselves, and are not collectively smart enough to deal with problems before they destroy civilization - a test humanity already confronted and passed in the Cold War.

Humanity is the most generalist animal species ever evolved, thriving with even simple technology in most of the land environments on this planet, and generalist species are not typically decimated by resource scarcities or climate change - they evolve.  In the case of a less intelligent generalist species, that evolution is biological - the new environments pressure genetic changes that cause local speciation, and now one species has become several.  In our case, evolution is technological, and occurs much more rapidly than biology could ever match.  As climate change alters environments, pressures will be exerted on technology to preserve them, but unlike in biological evolution, the progress that's made anywhere is instantly available everywhere.  This yields an evolutionary feedback loop directly proportional to the extent of the pressure, which could only be overwhelmed by pressures so extreme and rapid that the foundations of civilization are destroyed before progress has time to cycle.  Now, apart from the fact that virtually no one in the scientific community thinks the worst-case scenario will happen; apart from the total lack of evidence that it will happen; the notion that it would happen - that the laws of the universe so precisely conspire against us that disaster strikes at exactly the time in human history just before we could deal with it, is  to propose a cosmic joke worthy of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.  There may be some ironic attraction to  the idea, but it holds no merit in the real universe, so it simply will not happen.

The end result of all these "insurmountable problems," like all the insurmountable problems before them we've surmounted, will be a strange and beautiful future where the alleged Apocalypse of yesterday is the nuisance of today, and as-yet unimagined dangers confront us in a world of as-yet unimagined wonders.  Such is how human evolution works - we solve our problems, and the solutions confront us with new ones.  That is how we grow and evolve, and the reason humankind or its descendents will never die.  That is the reason our future will never end.  There is nothing to fear.  Ever.

This article gets a negative 12 stars out of a possible positive 5 stars because it throws away privacy rights and tells us we have no choice but to give up privacy.  Get the right president and we will have total privacy.  
Mark, Hey man that sucks because I don't retire until 2023!!  Did the History channel also tell you that every generation since the generation following Christs death has been looking for the Armageddon and then the return of Christ.  Yep!  Very documented throughout the ages.  I'm not saying it won't happen but believing what you believe put you in a mighty big club!!  Only thing is most of you a long dead and gone and the Armageddeon still awaits us.  

Once again people, stop worrying.  Yes . . global warming is bad, water shortages will be bad, heck . . . aramageddon will suck but we will adapt.  Preparation and cooperation are key.  Write YOUR CONGRESSMAN!  Tell him your concerns.
IN 50 YEARS THE WORLD "WILL" BE A DIFFERENT PLACE. WITH BIG BROTHER AT WORK, HOME, IN YOUR CAR AND EVERYWHERE ELSE WATCHING YOU! YOU WILL HAVE GOVERNMENT SECURITY CAMERAS IN YOUR HOME, ON EVERY STREET, EVERY ALLEY, EVERYWHERE IF YOUR 3YEAR OLD STEALS ONE OF YOUR 5YEAR OLD'S TOYS OUT OF THE TOY BOX THEY'LL BE CHARGED AS AN ADULT. WITH THE CURRENT SENTENCING LAWS BEING EXTENDED EVERY YEAR THEY'LL BE LUCKY TO GET 20 YEARS BY THEN. IF YOU GO OVER THE SPEED LIMIT BY 1 MPH. YOUR CAR WILL BE SURE TO CALL THE POLICE SO THEY CAN SEND YOU A TICKET IN THE MAIL OR EMAIL FOR $2000 OR MORE.  BY 2058 YOU WON'T BE ALLOWED TO CROSS ANY STATE LINE WITHOUT AN EYE SCAN, DNA, PLUS FINGER PRINT & A PASSPORT & 5 FORMS OF "REAL" ID. GUNS, DRINKING, SMOKING, CUSSING, RED MEAT, HARSH VIDEO GAMES & MOVIES WILL BE ILLEGAL. IN YOUR HOME THE ELECTRIC COMPANY WILL BE TELLING HOW MUCH ELECTRICITY YOU CAN USE & DIRECTLY CONTROLLING YOUR HEATER & A/C. THE WATER COMPANY WILL BE DOING THE SAME WITH YOUR WATER USAGE AND YOUR HOT WATER HEATER. IN YOUR LIVING ROOM YOUR TV,TELEPHONE,& COMPUTER WILL BECOME ONE UNIT THAT YOU'LL HAVE TO UP GRADE EVERY OTHER YEAR PLUS THE MONTHLY SERVICE FEES OF SEVERAL HUNDREDS OR THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS A MONTH. THE BOTTOM OF YOUR TV OR INTERNET SCREEN WILL HAVE A CONSTANT COMMERCIAL TICKER LIKE THE ONES NEWS CHANNELS USE NOW FOR NEWS. I COULD EVEN SEE COP CARS LOOKING LIKE ROLLING CLASSIFIEDS. IF YOU GO TO JAIL YOU WOULD HAVE A TV IN THE BACK OF THE COP CAR PLAYING NOTHING BUT COMMERCIALS FOR LAWYERS & BAIL BONDS. THE SAME IN THE JAIL CELLS. OH YES, THE CORP. WORLD & THE GOVERNMENT HAVE BIG DREAMS FOR OUR FUTURE!
I like the idea of a virtuial entertainment manager, but the idea that we will still have movies as a main scource of recreation is so yesterday.

As a writer, give me the ability to write a screenplay and directly turn my work into a realistic video. Not an amimation but something so realistic that it can't be told from the real thing. Something better than Lord of the Rings, for instance. It should be complete with actors who look like I think they should look and move as I dictate. Let the  music sound like I think is right, or let me have the ability to work it out with some other artist. But I should be able to set the scenes and dictate the action.

No more studios, no more producers, no more flesh and blood actors because they all represent comprimise on the part of the writer, who has to submit to the whims of all of the above until the final product bears little resembalance to his story.
Mark...step away from the TV.

Whheeeew!!
I have seen the future , and is a combination of "Max Headroom" & "Logan's Run". Blipverts & Carousel is what the future holds for us :-0
I'm with Magnum from Nashville, TN 100 %.  I'm a Libertarian.  Big Brother will NEVER allow that in 50 years.  SUPPORT THE SECOND AMENDMENT !  SUPPORT THE U.S. CONSTITUTION !  "From my cold dead hands..."

R.I.P. C.H.
All I have to say is: I want my jetpack and flying car that they promised me in their predictions 50 years ago!!
I believe that improvement in graphics will change the movie industry. Many actors today become the voices of animal charcters in cartoon movies, but in the future animation films will replace "real" movies. Actors will be able to continue to work much longer because we will see them as they were when they were young. I believe that by 2058 we will see the movie star replaced entirely and with their demise the obsessive gossip about every little they do, the roll model for our young, today (Movie Stars) with their self-centered life style will be gone.

I wait for the first virtual movie star.

As for comments about some of the writers above reading to many comic books I say, thank God they do. It is from the relm of science fiction and comics that many of the technologies of today came from. It is why Japan is pushing forward with robotics, their sciencists were brought up on a stable diet of AstroBoy. That is why Star trek fans of the sixties became computer geeks of the eighties. Look foward and dream.
Hey, Bill, as a writer, I love that idea!
The problem with these "visionaries" is that they are highly trained, but very poorly educated. They seem to have no historical or social perspective whatsoever. They are so enamored of their own specialties that they just lack balance. Even a simple Economics 101 course would do them wonders.
Vinton Cerf states "I am an optimist by nature..."  War, terrorism, poverty, and a host of other basic ills have been with mankind for thousands of years. Actually, the trend has been the other way.  With technological progress came machine guns, tanks, aircraft, nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons that made the 20th Century the bloodiest in history.

I AM an optimist.  But to think that Utopia will spring forth in the next 50 years is incredibly foolish and shows some people learn nothing from history.

About anyone can realistically say is that we will probably muddle thru as we have for the past few thousand years.  Other than that...  past predictions have turned out to be laughably and wholly unrealistic.

Are we suddenly also, in the next 50 years, eliminate poverty, bring democracy to all countries, and establish a "Golden Age" for mankind ?

The people in Haiti and elsewhere are now rioting over unaffordable food.  Tell them we are spending billions of dollars on space probes and new internet technology the internet technology and how do you think they will feel about that ?  

And where's my flying car and nuclear reactor that fits in my cellar and produces energy "too cheap to meter " ? !
I'm not a member of the Illuminati, but there are deep political ailments the human race has to address before any of the benefits from technology are reaped.
The health industry will change dramatically and many doctors may eventually lose their jobs. Artificial implants and personalized medicine will be so good people won't have to go to the doctor as often! Although we would probably need more surgeons (or robots) to put them in!

More and more of the algorithmic-jobs will be taken over by computers and robots. Virtual workplaces accessible by home computers via the internet will solve the "rush hour(s)" since it will eliminate the need to commute to work everyday.

Space cruises will be in the beginning stages. I predict scientists and engineers will be the first to inhabit the Moon or Mars on a long-term basis. During the Manhattan Project, they were able to get a bunch of scientists to move out into the middle of the desert for the sake of science and the war effort. The scientists are then going to want more earthly food so a restaurant or two will open up for them and slowly but surely more and more businesses will open to meet the demands of the scientists settled there.
More and more extraterrastrial jobs will be available and more non-scientists will move there and settle in.

A revolutionary discovery or invention will bring man-made CO2 emmissions to a near halt and the world will breathe a sigh of relief. Climates will still change (just not as drastically) due to the CO2 already emmitted, but we'll adjust and forget about it.

Europe will become one and much of the attention that is focused on the middle-east now will be focused on Africa or South America.

Humans as a society would be less divided and more concentrated on global efforts rather than national efforts. English will be the most common language in the world due to the being the dominant language on the Internet and computer compatability.

More crises will come, but we'll get through it.
Brian brings the truth stick.  Technology is a sentient species' adaptative response.  It's hyper-evolution.  It's saved us and maimed us and saved us again for millenia.  It's part of who we are and why we're collecting every other life form on this planet in cages or test tubes.  

If the human species were any more innately technologically savvy, religion would never have existed.  We'd have figured out enough of our world so quickly that we'd presume that every question could be answered by simply looking longer and harder.  Dieties would be out of a job.

The irony being that the concept of religion itself has often set the stage for the necessary conflicts which are crucial to technological advancement.  If there isn't a mouse to kill, there's no reason to build a better mousetrap.


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=915263

Latest Tech & Science News

Syndicate This Site

Add Cosmic Log to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google