/sci/ - Science & Math

Around 2029

>self driving cars will be widely commercially available?
2020 if google steps up their game.
>the average $1000 computer will have a petabyte hard drive?
seeing that we're only at 1TB and it took so many years for that... I say 2040-2050
>HIV will be curable?
2020-2030
>cancer will be curable?
2020-2030
>a ticket into space will cost less than $10,000?
2060+
>'hard' artificial intelligence will be developed?
2015 if IBM steps up their game.
>it will become commercially viable to harvest resources from space?
2100
>it will become commercially viable to have people live in space?
2100

>self driving cars will be widely commercially available?
early 2020's
>the average $1000 computer will have a petabyte hard drive?
late 2020's
>HIV will be curable?
this decade
>cancer will be curable?
2020's
>a ticket into space will cost less than $10,000?
2050's
>'hard' artificial intelligence will be developed?
late 2020's- early 2030's
>it will become commercially viable to harvest resources from space?
late this century, no sooner than 2050
>it will become commercially viable to have people live in space?
no sooner than 2075, but before 2100

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/05/dichloroacetate_and_cancer.php

cancer cure is in progress

>self driving cars will be widely commercially available?
Read somewhere that Google had tested a prototype program where a car had drived x thousand miles on its own. I'd say give it another 20 years. - 2030.
>the average $1000 computer will have a petabyte hard drive?
>HIV will be curable?
Around 2040.
>cancer will be curable?
2050.
>a ticket into space will cost less than $10,000?
No sooner than 2100.
>'hard' artificial intelligence will be developed?
2060+.
>it will become commercially viable to harvest resources from space?
2250+.
>it will become commercially viable to have people live in space?
Live in space=work. 2250+.

>self driving cars will be widely commercially available?
2020s
>the average $1000 computer will have a petabyte hard drive?
early 2020s
>HIV will be curable?
by 2020
>cancer will be curable?
by 2030
>a ticket into space will cost less than $10,000?
2050s
>'hard' artificial intelligence will be developed?
hard to say, depends. late 2010s/early 2020s being optimistic, 2040s being realistic
>it will become commercially viable to harvest resources from space?
2100+
>it will become commercially viable to have people live in space?
2150+

>>3346908
God not this shit again. IT DOESN'T FUCKING CURE CANCER, IT JUST FUCKS UP MITOCHONDRIA.

>>3346806
>>'hard' artificial intelligence will be developed?
>2015 if IBM steps up their game
you're fucking retarded

I was going to make a new thread for this, but it seems applicable here.

When do you think full body transfer (i.e. brains in vats/advance cybernetic replacement etc.) will be commercially available?

I hate the people saying we will have hard AI in 50 years or less.

Lowest you could go is 100 years from now.

you faggots don't know what you are talking about and need to stop reading pop sci

a cure for cancer is much more simple than hard AI

>>3346908

>>3346929
i didnt say it was the cure nigger i said it was a step in the direction

>>3346941
They said the human genome project would take 100 years. We're making pretty good progress. I'd say we develop hard AI in about twenty years, but no later than 2050. 100 years is not giving researchers enough credit.

Please keep this in mind when making predictions about the future.

I hear the soursop fruit cures cancer.

>self driving cars will be widely commercially available?
We have the technology it would be more about developing the infrastructure one self driving car wouldn't work too well it would have to be all the cars in the city.

>the average $1000 computer will have a petabyte hard drive? Well extrapolating it would 10-15 years but there may be physical limitations that will affect this.

>HIV will be curable?
Hard to say. The problem is its a moving target the virus mutates rapidly so creating a vaccine is not a one time thing. There are already rather effective treatments aids is not quite the killer it was even 10 years ago.
>cancer will be curable?
There are many different types of cancer many of which are easier to treat than others. However when we figure out medical nano tech treating cancers of all kinds should be childs play.
>a ticket into space will cost less than $10,000?
What do you mean by space? Low earth orbit probably by 2030 affordable trips to high earth orbit or the moon could be much much farther off.

>'hard' artificial intelligence will be developed?
I think people are too optimistic on this front we don't even know how our brains work I think that true AI is farther off than we think maybe 2050+

>>3346954

But many of those came true.

>>3346978

Please let this me a normal field trip?

>>3346954

>Photographs will be telegraphed from any distance
>People will live longer, healthier lives
>Telephones around the world
>Man will see around the world
>There will be air-ships
>Aerial War-ships & forts on wheels
>Automobiles will have replaced the horse
>doctors using x-rays

He got some things right

>>3346981
no

u must speak russian

>>3346984
See

>>3346980

>>3346980
>he thinks any of this bullshit over optimism will come true

>>3346954
Wow, some of that shit is surprisingly accurate.

In years...
5 >self driving cars will be widely commercially available?
20 >the average $1000 computer will have a petabyte hard drive?
20 >HIV will be curable?
30 >cancer will be curable?
80 >a ticket into space will cost less than $10,000?
50 >'hard' artificial intelligence will be developed?
350 >it will become commercially viable to harvest resources from space?
550 >it will become commercially viable to have people live in space?

People often forget the scale of scientific advancement we are experiencing. We are almost moving three times as fast as we were over the last hundred year, and that was the fastest century in human progress.

>>3347030
I agree with everything except the last two predictions. Way too long. We landed on the moon twelve years after the first satellite was launched into orbit. Heck, the first space station less was invented less than a century after the invention of flight. I don't think it'll take five hundred years to see people living in space.

>self driving cars will be widely commercially available?

2016

>the average $1000 computer will have a petabyte hard drive?
2014

>HIV will be curable?
It already is, http://www.presstv.com/detail/183761.html

>cancer will be curable?
2019

>a ticket into space will cost less than $10,000?
2023

>'hard' artificial intelligence will be developed?
2017

>it will become commercially viable to harvest resources from space?
2036

>it will become commercially viable to have people live in space?
2038

>>3347092
It would be pretty fuckwin if you turn out to be right, but...

>>3347092
Why so exact?

>>3347100

I'm from....
.
.
.
.
.
THE FUTURE!!!

>>3346954
Some of this is pretty good. But some of it is laughably wrong.
Free university education for every man and woman?
AAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
WHAT KIND OF RETARD
AHAHAHAHAHA.
;_;

>>3346954

>English will become a language of condensed words expressing condensed ideas.

lol

>>3347112
The free university education was like based on expansion or success of free compulsory education at the time.

But of course people lost interest, got dumber and universities care as much for education as their profit margins will allow. Just like every other fucking industry in the past 100 years (cept banking which was always that way)

>>3347136
I heartily laughed out loud after reading your ironic response.

>>3346954
By the way

>hot and cold air from spigots (HVAC)
>ready made meals (fast food and TV dinners)

Got the details wrong but the concepts are correct.

>>3347146
QFT

>self driving cars will be widely commercially available?

2025. Look at automobile innovation in the past 15 years and you'll see why the time distance is so great.

>the average $1000 computer will have a petabyte hard drive?

2018. Positive it will be within the 2016-2019 range.

>a ticket into space will cost less than $10,000?
>it will become commercially viable to harvest resources from space?
>it will become commercially viable to have people live in space?
All speculation. It depends on so many random or out of control factors. Depends on government funding, scientific discovery, political motives, and etc. Guessing, I'd say 2100, 2075, 2100. The moment it becomes cheap enough to send somebody into space is also the same moment it becomes financially practical enough for a corporation to send workers into space.

>cancer will be curable?

Ugh, I hate having to explain this. There cannot be a single "cure" for cancer. Every cancer is different, caused by mutations to different genes, be it activation of oncogenes, deactivation of tumour suppressor genes, mismatch repair genes, etc. It is not a single "disease" that you can use a blanket cure on, because each cancer expresses different genes, proteins, receptors, etc.

Pic related, it's as good a summary as you can get.

>>3346954
half of all of this is more or less correct... seems pretty accurate to me... especially considering its 100+ years old

>>3347171

>>3347112

I'm not going to be an ass and say Scandinavia is superior, but on this front it just really is. Free, financially supported education is just what every country needs.

We have universities generating profit even though the students pay nothing to go here.

>>3347171
All cancers have the same cause (damaged DNA) and effect (uncontrolled growth), the differences in symptoms are outliers and can usually be suppressed in the short term.

>>3347193
I wouldn't consider that ass-like at all. I simply cannot understand colleges here.
>Charge students for classes
>Low on money, cut classes
>Wonder why we are making even less money
>New liberal arts/administration building so directionless morons can dick around a few years after high school before settling into a service based economy that's increasingly unable to support itself this way
>Can't offer low level physics classes except in certain semesters, though they get instantly crowded by engineers and scientists when they are available

Here's one /sci/, what year do you estimate the education system will be improved?

There will be no AI and no space shit, since costs will forever be too high to reliably get something back from there, physics forbid it

In all honesty I think we're waiting for a moment when society is mature enough to shut NASA etc. down and just repurpose their huge budgets

>self driving cars will be widely commercially available?

2050

>the average $1000 computer will have a petabyte hard drive?

2015

>HIV will be curable?

No clue

>cancer will be curable?

No clue

>a ticket into space will cost less than $10,000?

2050

>'hard' artificial intelligence will be developed?

2100-2200

>it will become commercially viable to harvest resources from space?

2025

>it will become commercially viable to have people live in space?

2050

You are all faggots:
>self driving cars will be widely commercially available?
2020
>the average $1000 computer will have a petabyte hard drive?
2040
>HIV will be curable?
2040
>cancer will be curable?
2040
>a ticket into space will cost less than $10,000?
2060
>'hard' artificial intelligence will be developed?
2035
>it will become commercially viable to harvest resources from space?
2060
>it will become commercially viable to have people live in space?
2060 in LEO and on the Moon maybe

>>3347210
>damaged DNA

That's true, but it's not as simple as you make it sound by simply calling it "damaged DNA". One or two mutations in a cell probably won't cause a tumour, but they can deactivate DNA repair mechanisms, increase proliferation, etc., causing a cascade leading to more and more mutations until it makes absolutely no sense at all. This pic is a karyotype of a cancer cell. Something like this is beyond any form of repair. So what's the solution? Kill the cell. How do you kill the cell? By targeting features such as receptors overexpressed (or only expressed) on that particular cell. The problem is that like I said, every cancer cell has different features, and if they overexpress features present on normal cells, killing cancer cells will result in the death of normal cells as well. It's not as simple as repairing DNA.

>>3347215
Economically I consider myself quite right-of-center, but I still believe certain things such as education and healthcare should have significant government funding.

That's why I like the system we have here in Australia. There are no full-fee places in most universities. The government pays for your studies, and you are given a small, virtually interest-free loan that you have no time limit to pay off. I'm a medical student, and my "HECS" loan is about $9,000 a year. That means that at the end of my studies, I will have a $45,000 debt, and that will be paid back as a percentage of my income ABOVE a certain threshold for as long as it takes to pay the full thing off.

>self driving cars will be widely commercially available?
30 years minimum
>the average $1000 computer will have a petabyte hard drive?
10 years
>HIV will be curable?
30 years
>cancer will be curable?
some form of cancer - 10 years, all cancer 40 years
>a ticket into space will cost less than $10,000?
40 years
>'hard' artificial intelligence will be developed?
40 years
>it will become commercially viable to harvest resources from space?
60 years
>it will become commercially viable to have people live in space?
60 years

How about something a little more grim:

>How long until all existing antibiotics become useless due to widespread resistance and large portions of the population start dying from infectious diseases again?

In the future (of time jump intentionally left blank), should our understanding and technological level be sufficient, we might be able to back up our minds--scanning/recording ones brain structure/other-variables and imprinting this into a new artificially created biological brain.

Hows that for a incredible vague possible future outcome?

>>3346954

When was that published?

>>3347281
>Copying your brain onto an artificial brain

Without speculating as to whether or not this is possible, I think this would be a terrible idea. Maybe I'm just incredibly narcissistic, but I see no benefit of something that is not me (i.e. not my consciousness) living on with my memories and knowledge.

>>3347275
That'll be a long wa-
>People putting unnecessary antibiotics in fucking everything from cowfood or some shit to soap and bandaids

We're fucked.

>>3347285
>implying your brain doesn't change chemically

>the average $1000 computer will have a petabyte hard drive?

Seems to be ~2020 if it continues at the same rate.

>>3347285
>>3347285
>>3347285
>>3347285

I said:

>artificially created biological brain

As in using tissue engineering+cloning+nano technology (and any other technology for this that might arise in the future) to "3D print out," the stored brain scan data.

>>3347288
Doesn't matter. I honestly don't know how to word this, but...my "existence" and my "being" are what I am right now. I am conscious and I have my own thoughts. If my brain was copied onto something else, that would now be "me". If I were still alive, it would be an identical copy of me. If I then died, well then I'd be dead, and that copy would continue living its own existence.

>>3347136

lol'd hard

>>3347285
>but I see no benefit of something that is not me (i.e. not my consciousness) living on with my memories and knowledge.

But a lot of other people could see a use. This could be used for slave labor, military infantry (copy soldiers and alter their brain data so that they could still out number enemies while not necessarily having the flaws of 'an army of one'), and not to mention how some sudo-religious people might see it as an 'after life'...

>>3347136

>English will become a language of condensed words expressing condensed ideas.
>inb4: Text speak

>self driving cars will be widely commercially available?
2020
>the average $1000 computer will have a petabyte hard drive?
2040
>HIV will be curable?
Wasn't this done already?
>cancer will be curable?
When nano bots will be made so 2040
>a ticket into space will cost less than $10,000?
2030-maybe sooner
>'hard' artificial intelligence will be developed?
>it will become commercially viable to harvest resources from space?
This is like way out there.
>it will become commercially viable to have people live in space?
2100- me long dead fuck

>cancer will be curable?

Which one?

>'hard' artificial intelligence will be developed?

I don't know what you mean.

>>3347295
But your always mentally changing over time. The 'you' several decades ago would not think exactly like the 'you' now (assuming that there was sufficient impacts and experiences between said gap)--or try comparing yourself as you are now to a future self with complete amnesia. As for the copying thing; how about thinking of it like something akin to mitosis?

>>3347291
And in 2030 we will have 1 exabyte (1000 Petabytes) harddrives. HNNGGGGG.

That's god damn 1,000,000 TB

>>3347344
>When nano bots will be made so 2040

Fuck ya! I will be able to become a fifty year old JC Denton!

>>3347295
You are aware that most of your body fully dies and changes in around 7 years due to cell renewal ?

>>3347396
Not the anon you're replying to...

Here is how I think of myself:

I am a multitude.
I am a hive of trillions upon trillions of microorganisms;
All competing-
All dividing-
All living in nigh-symbiotic harmony...

I am a multitude.
I am a the hive mind of cells...

How was it? Should I venture to /lit/?

>>3347409
>I am a the hive mind of cells...
>I am the hive mind of cells...

fixed!

>self driving cars will be widely commercially available?
2015-2020, Google just needs to make it mass available.
>the average $1000 computer will have a petabyte hard drive?
2025 or so, if we follow the trends in capacity.
>HIV will be curable?
2020s, I hope.
>cancer will be curable?
As others said, there is no ultimate cure. I do hope that nanotechnology could be tailored to attack specific kinds of cancers cells of a certain person.
>a ticket into space will cost less than $10,000?
Space? Mars? LEO? GEO? Moon?
2030s. Why so late? I find it hard to believe that private companies can really make it that cheap soon. I hope that I'm wrong though.
>'hard' artificial intelligence will be developed?
What's wrong with everyone here, 2020s,2030s? It wont be here before 2070s. There are gaps in our computer and programming theory that need to be filled before we can even think about soft AI.
>it will become commercially viable to harvest resources from space?
2060s. I seriously doubt that before that EO factories will be established enough for asteroid mining to be viable.
>it will become commercially viable to have people live in space?
2050s for space hotels, 2060s for some permanent bases, hopefully on Mars.

That's as realistic as it can get.

>>3347409
If that's the case, I fail to see why would identical hive mind of artificial microorganisms in the same pattern cease to be you.

>>3347423
What about aerostats in Venuses upper atmosphere (where pressure and temperature 'safe' for human life and our breathable air is buoyant)?

>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Venus#Upper_atmosphere_and_ionosphere

>Despite the harsh conditions on the surface, the atmospheric pressure and temperature at about 50 km to 65 km above the surface of the planet is nearly the same as that of the Earth, making its upper atmosphere the most Earth-like area in the Solar System, even more so than the surface of Mars. Due to the similarity in pressure and temperature and the fact that breathable air (21% oxygen, 78% nitrogen) is a lifting gas on Venus in the same way that helium is a lifting gas on Earth, the upper atmosphere has been proposed as a location for both exploration and colonization.[9]

>>3347428
I conquer (again: I'm not the anon who thinks a copy is not him/herself). If my individual components undergo replication, why not the sum of this hive-organism (or why not make several instances and network all of our minds together to form an even bigger hive-being)

>self driving cars will be widely commercially available?
Possibly in the next 20-30 years.
>the average $1000 computer will have a petabyte hard drive?
Never, the density of the petabyte hard drive is 10^-15. A hydrogen atom is 10^-10
>HIV will be curable?
Evolves too fast, will never be one single cure.
>cancer will be curable?
All cancer? a long time.
>a ticket into space will cost less than $10,000?
100+ years
>'hard' artificial intelligence will be developed?
30-80 years
>it will become commercially viable to harvest resources from space?
60 years
>it will become commercially viable to have people live in space?
50 years.

I love speculating.

>self driving cars will be widely commercially available?
2030, later if major infrastructure needs to be put in place. Don't see a market for it though, driving is such a large part of culture that I think people wouldn't be willing to readily give it up, no matter how convenient a self-driving car would be.

>the average $1000 computer will have a petabyte hard drive?
Again, around 2030.

>HIV will be curable?
I'm actually quite optimistic about this. 2020.

>cancer will be curable?
2090 at the absolute earliest. As others have said, we'd have to wait for advanced nanotechnology and I'm still pretty skeptical about it being such an end-all-be-all for medicine. Speaking as a biochemistry major, I firmly believe we will never find a real "cure" The range of possible mutations is so vast that I don't think it's possible to find all of them. Even if we knew every cancer-causing mutation, it's still a matter of prevention rather than treatment. What we need to truly cure cancer is to tackle it at it's root: either undo the mutation and return the cells to normal function, or stop cell growth and metastasis entirely. The only thing that would be capable of treating all forms of cancer would be nanotech.

>>3347468 continued

>a ticket into space will cost less than $10,000?
Kinda optimistic about this one. 2025. I think suborbital flights or low-orbit flights are going to get real cheap, real soon with all the commercial ventures into spaceflight lately.

>'hard' artificial intelligence will be developed?
Tough one. I'm going to play it safe and say 2100. We'd have to figure out how our own intelligence and conciousness works first before we create an artificial one. No amount of processing power can simulate a real human mind, I think AI needs to be the result of a very non-traditional approach.

>it will become commercially viable to harvest resources from space?
2100. Not really clear on what the economic reprecussions of it will be, nor what we're going to be mining up there. If it's precious metals, it won't be commercially viable at all; haul a few platinum-rich asteroids back to Earth and suddenly your expected return isn't as high since the market value of platinum has just dropped dramatically due to the Earth's supply of platinum rising dramatically. Sagan talks about it in Pale Blue Dot.

>it will become commercially viable to have people live in space?
Late 2100s. Tons of problems with it. First you'd have to convince thousands if not millions of people that it'd be awesome to live in constant danger of depressurization, deorbit, radiation exposure and space debris. "lol but you get to be in outer space" is not good enough. Next, a very cheap way to get masses of people into space. I'm talking about a 23nd century equivalent of a ticket to Ellis Island. Finally, orbital construction. It took years to build the ISS to its current state and it's still essentially a bunch of pressurized tubes. We need O'Neill cylinders if we want a significant human presence in space and that is not happening anything soon, certainly not in the current century or early in the next.

>>3347445
It would be a perfect place for a base, but I'm not aware of any immediate natural resources that would make it viable. There hopefully might exist a scientific base, but until some sort of local economy is not established, no bases there. My estimate is perhaps late 2070s, if we go for Mars base first (which we should).

>>3347468
>driving is such a large part of culture that I think people wouldn't be willing to readily give it up, no matter how convenient a self-driving car would be.

You remind me of the people back in the early 20th century who claimed cars were fads and the horse would stay as the mean of transportation. While I doubt we'll see the majority of people getting drivers cars the second they come out, within a decade or two, they will be much cheaper. By as early ad 2050, I would wager the majority of developed nations would have drivers cars

>>3347483
meant to say driverless cars, not drivers cars

>>3347476

There go's my dreams of flying around Venus. How likely is nano tech to enable an eighty something to ninety year old man (during the late 2070) to do this, should such a base be established?

This: >>3347379 anon btw.

>>3347469
If overpopulation becomes a serious problem, it'll be cheaper to tow people up, make them build their own homes, control machines that make parts for homes etc. than to keep them here.However, only way the space stations will succeed in short term is full self sustainability - they need to recycle their own air, water and produce hydroponic food. Much, much later they may depend on imported food, but until it's all stabilized and safe, self-sustainability is a must.

>>3347458
I don't think that original poster would like that idea. It implies that you are under control of something bigger, not yourself anymore but a part of larger organism. Hurts the vision of individuality, you see.

>>3347483
It would of course be available, but he's talking about public acceptance, which is a tricky thing. Imagine 30 average people on, lets say, a bus. They'd trust a human driver (even if he might be drunk) over a machine. Fuck you Terminator, fuck you. Eventually it will become normal, but it will take time to get acceptance.

>>3347493
Well, I hope that average human lifespan will be quite prolonged by then, which would make a 90yo man have at least 15-20 more years of life (which is somewhat optimistic, but still..). If you were a scientist who's an authority on Venus and you have experience with working in space (which would be much easier to get by then than it is right now), you'd have a good chance of getting into, if not original team, then in one of first teams that'll be in that base, doing research.
Of course, be prepared to die because some seemingly irrelevant part that was made in china by the lowest bidder breaks and your whole base starts sinking into lower levels where you suffocate and get crushed by pressure, in that order. Just kidding man, you'll do great, I hope you get into that god damn team :D

>>3347495
> Hurts the vision of individuality, you see.

Well for me, my "vision of individuality," is utterly irrelevant when compared to the survival to the actual system I am a result of.

>>3347275

I'm not too concerned about the antibiotics, scientists are currently looking into the proteins at surfaces of bacteria that they use to work and make us ill, if we can find how they work we might biologically engineer something that will destroy that specific gene. Yes it is complicated but once it works it will be awesome.

>>3347518
Pic related.

>>3346954
>2001
>500 million people

where did we go wrong?

>>3347564
500m in Amurrika.
It was easier to get citizenship and move there than now. If I, for example, were to move into USA (if, a large if, they'd give me visa and green card) I'd have to live for some 10 years there, and then maybe citizenship. Of course, it's extremely hard to get green card, so fuck that.

>>3347423
>>3347467
>>3347468

>mfw fags still speculating over HIV being cured when it has already been cured and even mentioned several times in this thread...

>>3347582
>extremely expensive cure for 1% of the people
>it's not even a cure, it's nuking your own immune system and planting bone marrow of person genetically immune to it

How about no.

>>3347744

How about making a man made retro virus that makes your cells gain that genetic immunity when they go under DNA replication?

>>3347846
A lot harder than you think.

>>3347892
Then a repressor protein, that would block the operating cells.

>2035
>2022
>2040
>2017
>2134
>SOON
>2300
>2300

>self driving cars will be widely commercially available?
Probably around 2018 in Nevada 2021 in China between 2020-2025 rest of the world
>the average $1000 computer will have a petabyte hard drive?
2023
>HIV will be curable? its already threatadble, to completely cure it could take a long time so 2035?
>cancer will be curable?
a lot of kinds of cancers are already curable, the hard ones could take a lot more
>a ticket into space will cost less than $10,000?
once we have antigravity and thats anyones guess, so 2025-2225??
>'hard' artificial intelligence will be developed?
2030-45
>it will become commercially viable to harvest resources from space?
the same as antigravity
>it will become commercially viable to have people live in space?
the space station already exists, but yeah you need propellentless travel for that likely too to become widespread,

>self driving cars will be widely commercially available?
2016
>the average $1000 computer will have a petabyte hard drive?
2350
>HIV will be curable?
Virus is not a disease, hence incurable
>cancer will be curable?
All forms, 2016
>a ticket into space will cost less than $10,000?
2014
>'hard' artificial intelligence will be developed?
2014
>it will become commercially viable to harvest resources from space?
2018
>it will become commercially viable to have people live in space?
2021

>>3347467
>Never, the density of the petabyte hard drive is 10^-15. A hydrogen atom is 10^-10
The fuck you on about?

Okay, someone seriously needs to define what they mean by "hard" AI.

>self driving cars will be widely commercially available?
2020
>the average $1000 computer will have a petabyte hard drive?
2030ish
>HIV will be curable?
2020-2025
>cancer will be curable?
2020-2025
>a ticket into space will cost less than $10,000?
2050
>'hard' artificial intelligence will be developed?
2025
>it will become commercially viable to harvest resources from space?
2075
>it will become commercially viable to have people live in space?
2100+

>cancer will be curable?

cancer is already curable, but you dont have to know it, dwell in lies and ignorance my friends, because lying scientist-prostitutes are in need of your money for more useless bullshit and medicine that slowly kills you.

>>3348011
more commonly called strong AI
it's not really that ambiguous
soft AI is stuff like blue brain. not really intelligent.
strong AI is somehow programming what we could call 'intelligence'. an ability to autonomously solve new puzzles and the like.

>>3348011
The answer is 10^{100}

>>3348028
i meant deep blue, playing chess, not blue brain.
blue brain could arguably be strong AI, though it wouldn't represent a solution, or understanding of the hard AI problem.

>MFW around 2040 World War 3 starts over the last major resource deposits after China invades Australia and the Middle East.

Seriously, none of this shit is going too happen because Politicians today have no foresight when it comes to sustainability for the future.

One must remember, by 2040 it is predicted that we will be out of fucking Oil and we will replace it with what? there is no serious push to replace Oil at the moment and I think it is starting to get a little late dealing with this major, major problem.

>>3348048
That's when the developing world will rise and we will fall. Since they have fuck all technology now, they have an easier time building renewable energy sources, since their infrastructure is not dependent on oil in the same high degree.

Strong AI is AI that can perform any mental task that a person can.

We're far off.

>>3348048
People always forget the power of pressure. When the world loses its oil it will be put under pressure and find a way to survive. We survived the Black Plague, we survived the Great Depression, we survived two World Wars, and we survived the Cold war, we will survive the depletion of oil. Humanity always finds a way.

we have technology for self driving cars now. I'm saying 8 years for the technology to be refined, and no idea for how long getting them legal will take.
they wouldn't be hard drives, they'd be SSDs. We'll need to wait until we have <15nm memory, which will take about 5 years, but to be commercially possible add another 10. I doubt the computers will be under $1000 new, due to inflation.
There's already a cure for HIV. It's chemotherapy, and it will be more likely to injure you than medicated HIV/AIDS. For an actual cure, probably about 15 years
Cancer isn't curable in the traditional sense because it isn't bacterial/viral. Being able to remove tumours non-invasively and without chemo/radiotherapy will take us about 5 years and will not always be completely successful. Being able to cure cancer at the genetic level will take at least 30 years.
It won't, ever.
at least half a century
after humans leave earth. For rare earth minerals especially, the quantity of minerals retrieved from asteroid mining would plunge earth prices significantly making it significantly less viable than estimated currently.
I don't know, there are too many factors.

>>3348059

But we already know how to turn grass into gass. Not to mention current advances/drives in alternative means of power.

>>3348061

That's not true. The software is the easy part. The hardware is what isn't there yet.

Once somebody solves the hardware problem the software will be EASY.

>>3346954
>spelling by sound will have been adopted

Why couldn't this be true?

>>3348312
Most other languages have words kinda spelled like they sound.

English however has it all backwards, no word is spelled as it's spoken.

>>3348367

How about visible, textural (touch), and other non-sound based languages?

>>3348228
Are you high?

>>3348159
For us it's about replacing things, and the longer we've had a certain state of affairs going, the more resistence we'll have. But the developing countries aren't replacing stuff as much as building it in the first place.

>>3348228
>implying we understand the brain well enough to model it accurately

>self driving cars will be widely commercially available?
2025, IF the problem of liability is solved.
>the average $1000 computer will have a petabyte hard drive?
2025.
>HIV will be curable?
2050
>cancer will be curable?
2300 or later, unless we really DO have a singularity
>a ticket into space will cost less than $10,000?
Never, inflation. But in current dollars, 2080.
>'hard' artificial intelligence will be developed?
2070 at the earliest
>it will become commercially viable to harvest resources from space?
2070, when we're already using what we can find on Earth
>it will become commercially viable to have people live in space?
2100, space isn't a great place to live

>>3348228
>The software is the easy part.
Oh good lord I'm laughing so damn hard

You poor fool. We could run brain simulations NOW if this there the case - they would just run slowly.

>self driving cars will be widely commercially available?
2025
>the average $1000 computer will have a petabyte hard drive?
2050
>HIV will be curable?
2040's
>cancer will be curable?
supposedly already is 2010's
>a ticket into space will cost less than $10,000?
2150
>'hard' artificial intelligence will be developed?
2030
>it will become commercially viable to harvest resources from space?
2150
>it will become commercially viable to have people live in space?
2200

Oh god, there are poor sods who think cancer is going to be cured in the near future. Really?

see
>>3347171

>>3347136
iseewhatyoudidthere.obj

>>3347112
Bro, in countries other than America, university education *IS* free.

You guys don't have a free education because that's SOCIALISM OMG EVIL KILL IT

>>3347224
if cancer is so uncontrollable and devastating to DNA then how does it sometimes disappear with treatment? how does it sometimes disappear on its own? i'm not religionfag, but my mom prayed over an old man with cancer once and he went to get a check up the next week and it was gone. something has to be happening whether it's the body's response to it or if the cancer dies because of some element.

http://www.futuretimeline.net/

Here's some things to think about.

>>3348869
Getting lucky is not the same as being cured. Even rabies was never 100% fatal without treatment.

>>3348890
but it's not lucky. there's a science to it there are no coincidences, there are no accidents. just chaos

lol it says osama was killed this year. what a crock. he was killed 3 or 4 years ago; maybe more.

>>3346785
in the year 2525
oh, sorry, Twenty-Five-Twenty-Five

>>3348901
> there's a science to it there are no coincidences, there are no accidents. just chaos
Winning the random-number-god's lottery is what it means to be "lucky". I was not invoking anything supernatural. And yes, I know that chaos theory is deterministic.

What are you arguing? Whether ultimately deterministic or probabilistic, the word "lucky" still just means that you got a favorable outcome without ensuring it would happen.

>>3348934
i let my thoughts run away from me, but "lucky" doesn't just answer what has actual science behind it. known or unknown.

>>3348960
Agreed, I didn't mean it to be a curiosity-stopper or a reason not to study cancer.

lol at everyone itt posting unrealistic timelines just because they want to see this happen, you fags know you won't see any of this while you live, accept it already and stop dreaming

>>3349007
>mfw i'll be riding a t-rex in a cowboy hat in 10 years
>mfw u jelly
>mfw i have no face