/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.3625098]

Realistic Sci-fi predictions for the future:

<We will all become secular humanist moralfags>

because of this

<We will no longer kill animals for food, all meat / protein will be cultured from stem cells (e.g. we will grow a chickanwing and not a chickan)>

<We will extract resources, rare metals and minerals from other planets and celestial bodies in our solar system>

<We finally manage to empirically prove a refined variant of string theory>

<We will be posting in chinese>

<Things will look much brighter, fuckan HD glare everywhere>

[Anonymous No.3625108]

> <We finally manage to empirically prove a refined variant of string theory>
ST isn't the only candidate, LQG also has a chance. It's hard to say at the moment, I think we should reserve belief for now.
> <We will be posting in chinese>
Why? I'd say english is more universal than chinese for now.

My predictions (assuming a nice future)?
We will reach SIM (substrate-independent minds), maybe also AGI (Aritifical General Intelligence) and MNT (molecular nanotechnology), in varying degrees of time. Whichever we reach first is unknown. I give it 30-50 years.
Once SIM (or if you want "mind uploading") becomes feasible, you'll end up with people living in VR cities (think Egan's Diaspora).

Of course, I don't make any solid predictions because I assume MWI to be likely true, in which case there are many many futures which start at this point. Of course, no futures which prove physical theories incompatible with whatever the universal law is.

[Anonymous No.3625106]

<We won't be alive>

[Anonymous No.3625135]

<we finally catch that dastardly electron>

[Anonymous No.3625147]

History will repeat itself. Bread a circus will be used to pacify the cities. Society will be divided into an entertainment class and a working class. Majority of people will take the path of least resistance and little real progress will be made. Man will never go beyond the solar system.

[Anonymous No.3625164]

<facebook buys over several small countries>

[Anonymous No.3625174]

Bitcoins become illegal.

[Anonymous No.3625212]

We will cease to use language altogether and communicate 'telepathically' using computer chips in our brains to transmit ideas

[Anonymous No.3625238]

>>3625212
http://www.infinityplus.co.uk/stories/tap.htm was a pretty cool idea, too bad there's 2 problems with it:
1) It's actually very hard to implement for humans since human brains are pretty different individually. It may be less effort to design an AI which supports sharing entire though-structures (OpenCog is designed to support that)
2) It may be easier to to so for mind uploads (still a difficult problem since it's just a huge neural network), but at least one won't have to deal with rather difficult physical problems that would arise.

[Anonymous No.3625252]

><We will be posting in chinese>

You said realistic predictions.

[Anonymous No.3625265]

><We will be posting in chinese>

I don't this so, tim.

><We won't be alive>

I don't this so, tim.

[Anonymous No.3625276]

>>3625098
We will continue to find that, as slow as evolution is, it has been exceedingly clever at utilizing physical phenomena still out of our grasp. Total understanding of the brain remains "ten years out" for the next 100 years.

The project takes a backseat to augmenting the main organs of the rest of the body, and slowing down natural atrophy of the brain, all successfully.

Advertising takes advantage of human impulses so efficiently that it is broadly banned, except in extremely limited forms. Manufacturers circumvent this through entertainment media with moderate success.

Raw nanomachines fail to materialize except in trivial forms with little use. Technology in that vein is used instead to customize and otherwise augment existing lifeforms. Radical elements have hacked such organisms and caused several panics and hundreds of thousands of deaths from modified diseaes, but major outbreaks and war never materialize.

[Anonymous No.3625281]

Space Elevators
Mars Terraform
Venus Terraform

[Anonymous No.3625286]

<We will be posting in chinese>
English is the lingua franca not because America fuck yeah but because it is grammatically incredibly easy and the alphabet and pronunciation is simple.

Chinese is much more complex and harder to learn. Hence it will never become the substitute of English.

[Anonymous No.3625290]

>>3625238
Well the idea was of course assuming that computer technology would continue to progress at an exponential rate. I'm sure if some sort of A.I. was invented, it could adapt itself to an individuals brain.

[Anonymous No.3625294]

>>3625174
This pretty much HAS to happen. Here's why:

Let's say your employer offers you the option to get $50,000 per year the usual way, or $25,000 the usual way and $20,000 in bitcoins.

You'd take the second deal, because almost half your income would be untraceable and therefore untaxable. You'd come out way ahead.

The modern nation-state cannot exist without income tax revenue; so it MUST, sooner or later, kill ANY form of untraceable currency.

[Anonymous No.3625296]

>>3625276
Even an incomplete understanding would still be useful. For example, even if you don't implement support for 100% of the neurotransmitters, I would still expect a 'mind upload' to mostly work. Incremental steps.

[Anonymous No.3625300]

>>3625252
Fuck that, a science based society would never view speaking Chinese as efficient. It has thousands of different characters, whereas English gets by with only 26.

[Anonymous No.3625315]

>>3625294
It won't be enforceable. Bitcoins can be and should be run through Tor by default. If they try to make it illegal, it will just drive it harder to kill (same as P2P file sharing). You can't truly kill useful technologies once they gain enough public visibility and use(btc already has).
If they go down that road, I would expect trading between other currencies to just be done in other countries or through more "over-the-counter" means (it already has something like that). Also, they already tried this for various types of digital cash which is decentralized, and either failed or succeeded (in the sense that it was something too little used and people just stopped using that particular currency and moved to another one).

[Anonymous No.3625318]

>>3625296
There's no reason (yet) to suppose that minds can be uploaded or downloaded. Our understanding of what the mind actually IS, what consciousness actually is, is approximately zilch at the moment.

Some smart folks (like Roger Penrose) suspect that consciousness is uncomputable, and therefore cannot be transferred to any Turing-machine equivalent.

[Anonymous No.3625338]

>>3625315
Remember that the servers have to be physically located somewhere, and that ALL nations will share an interest in eliminating Bitcoins (or their successors). Only small nations which make their money off tourism or bribery could host them -- and those are easily conquered. And they WILL be, if necessary; the survival of existing regimes will require it.

[Anonymous No.3625350]

The US will almost certainly become a social democracy

[Anonymous No.3625354]

>>3625296
I'd bet mind-uploading will not work within the next 100 years.

[Anonymous No.3625360]

>>3625318
Most neuroscientists and even physicists think Penrose is wrong and that the brain's actions is computable. I don't think Penrose even holds his opinion that strongly today. Also, even if Penrose would be right, it doesn't stop anyone from making more suitable architectures.
Personally, I'm a computationalist who only accepts 2 views as valid on consciousness:
1) Illusion (Dennet's view). Not particularily the one which I take, but I don't think it's absolutely wrong.
2) Supervenes on "platonic" computation. (Bruno Marchal's view). This is close to my view, since I accept functionalism (see: http://consc.net/papers/qualia.html for why), but since I have no problem with "platonic" computation (as I think Universal Dovetailer is a good (restricted) model for why our world might exist, but it also provides a way to explain consciousness when viewed from a different angle).

Either way, when I will see a machine act as intelligently as a human and claim that they are 'conscious' (have internal state), I would accept their claim. The same would go for a mind upload where someone's biological neural network was scanned and instantiated in a simulation. The simulation would think it's conscious and I would give it as much credence as I do to any other human I meet (I can only claim that I am conscious, I cannot do but infer that others are also conscious based on their similarity of behavior).

[Anonymous No.3625369]

<The Entire Continent of Australia will become a giant open pit mine>

[Anonymous No.3625372]

>>3625354
Is this because you have the same view as >>3625318 ?

I would just imagine that whenever successful "uploads" or just AGI's based on large-scale neural networks (think DARPA/HP/IBM SyNAPSE) will start behaving like humans you will just act like a speciest and claim that they are p. zombies.

[Anonymous No.3625376]

>>3625360
Consciousness cannot be an illusion. If it were, who would it be fooling?

[Anonymous No.3625390]

>>3625372
No, I think it is because the level of complexity of life is vastly underestimated right now. There's already movements discovering that all that "junk" DNA isn't junky at all. I think chances are very high that the operation of the brain will remain relatively mysterious---for the purposes of mind-uploads, understand---for over a century. We will have chased free will away, made amazing progress on treating brain illnesses and possibly even find ways of repairing damaged brains, halting or reversing atrophy, brain-machine interfaces, etc., but all these techniques will be "crude" enough to not permit the kind of understanding necessary for consciousness transfer.

[Anonymous No.3625398]

>>3625376
It is from the 3rd person perspective. It is not if you take into account the first person perspective. This is why I favor viewpoint 2, which is perfectly compatible with functionalism (read Chalmer's link I posted if you're not familiar with functionalism).

[Anonymous No.3625414]

>>3625390
> consciousness transfer.
Let's say they scanned an entire brain and rebuilt the neural network in a special-purpose CPU (let's say some neuromorphic hardware). It would work mostly fine, maybe identical to how you would behave, maybe with some differences.
However, I'm guessing you would think you died because of some continuity loss (since you seem to believe in continuity of consciousness).
Possibly relevant: brainpreservation.org/documents/killed_by_bad_philosophy.pdf

[Anonymous No.3625438]

>>3625398
Never found much favor with functional accounts of the mind. But, unpopularly, I consider consciousness to be largely an epiphenomenon related to delayed feedback.

[Anonymous No.3625459]

>>3625414
> Let's say they scanned an entire brain and rebuilt the neural network in a special-purpose CPU (let's say some neuromorphic hardware).
If I grant you that, then I would grant you transfer of consciousness, or at least cloning thereof.

[Anonymous No.3625477]

>>3625398
>>3625438
my reaction to these is completely not real, and doesnt exist in the space time continuum, it exist in the past present and future at the same time, and my brain isnt real, i perceive nothing, my brain is lying to me about how much of a faggot you are

i must learn from the beings of the 5th dimension once they show me the true meaning of reality, only through pyschoactive drugs of course, to unleash the true power of the third eye

[Anonymous No.3625485]

MATH QUESTION: Why is it true that -|a| =< a =< |a|. Isn't a just a? Why should it EVER be equal to its negative absolute value? Wouldn't we have to be talking about NEGATIVE a?

[Anonymous No.3625528]

>>3625485
0 and negative numbers.
a can be any number from negative infinity to positive infinity.

[Anonymous No.3625585]

>>3625528

Right, that makes sense, thanks.

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.3626151]

>>3625108

>SIM (substrate-independent minds)
>MNT (molecular nanotechnology)
>Greg Egan reference
>I assume MWI to be likely true

Hi Eliezer!

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.3626162]

2020: Robert Fretias dies in a car accident, effectively ending all nanotechnology research
2030: Ray Kurzweil turns 82, is deprived of life by an aneurysm in the aorta, is cryopreserved at Alcor.
2032: Ralph Merkle, who was still optimistic about getting funding for nanotechnology, dies and is cryopreserved.
2035: It's a time of great innovation and technological advancement... But with Merkle and Freitas dead, the word 'nanotechnology' has come to mean materials science and there's no-one left to pursue the dream of MNT.
2042: SIAI gets it's first researcher with an actual PhD.
2045: Still no mechanosynthesis.
2046: Eric Drexler dies.
2050: Still no mechanosynthesis.
2060: DIY genetics, still no mechanosynthesis.
2070: Still no mechanosynthesis.
2101: After decades of nothing, a kid with an atomic force microscope cracks diamondoid mechanosynthesis. Too late because the world has fallen into a dark age, so instead of starting the Diamond Age he becomes a warlord of the post-apocalyptic wastelands and lives a good life and gets laid a lot because the girls of the unwashed masses will do anything for a meal.

[Anonymous No.3626167]

><We will no longer kill animals for food, all meat / protein will be cultured from stem cells (e.g. we will grow a chickanwing and not a chickan)>

This has less to do with morals and much more to do with it being far less time consuming to just directly produce the meat instead of the whole animal.

[Anonymous No.3626173]

Haha delusions of "humanity being an immortal species"

That's even worse than religious soul-nonsense.

[SNSD !SNSDpejnC. No.3626175]

>>3625098

>We will be posting in chinese

Nope.

The defacto language of the world will be a sort of English crossed with Esperanto type thing with some Asian influences.

Even so countries don't just lose their original language. People in Estonia still speak Estonian despite having to be bilingual with English to do anything in the oustide world.

[married oldfag !VqaXcWQC4Q No.3626181]

<due to the Second Demographic Transition world population peaks in 2012, is table until about 2025, then plunges
<Because of the dependence ratio, social welfare programs vanish by 2025
<Declining population strongly devalues real estate, commodities, and manufacturing values worldwide
<By 2100 world population is overwhelmingly composed of the devoutly religious
<declining populations demand more direct governmental forms: democracies fade away and are replaced with monarchies with strong religious ties
<Due to relative abundance of resources and no population pressure, war becomes less frequent, smaller in scale, ideologically-driven, and limited to only 'professional' forces and mercenaries

[Anonymous No.3626184]

>>3626162
>dat timeline

[Anonymous No.3626197]

>>3625098
it will be as in the time of Noah; people will be eating, and drinking, and getting married, and giving each other away in marriage

and sudden catastrophe will fall on them

the times of Noah; wickedness abounds, homosex is applauded; gluttony and drunkenness are rampant; people turn away from God, then suddenly

it starts to rain

and you're outside the Ark

[Anonymous No.3626199]

>>3626175
Sup?

[SNSD !SNSDpejnC. No.3626207]

>>3626199
Dat Seohyun <3

[Anonymous No.3626210]

>>3626175

You do realize, on a global scale, the most common language is chinese.

The reason why people say chinese will take over is because, while the population of current chinese speakers is concentrated into a single country, they're insinuating china will take over the world thus dispersing that population and the language with it.

[Anonymous No.3626219]

><We will all become secular humanist moralfags>
NOT IF THE INTERNET STILL EXISTS.

[Anonymous No.3626247]

2016, the war between men and machines begins....

[None !H/0I/wzioo No.3626255]

>>3626207
2019: Korean plastic surgery advances to the point where the average girl is as glorious as SeoHyun...

[SNSD !SNSDpejnC. No.3626270]

>>3626210

>You do realize, on a global scale, the most common language is chinese.

Nope. You even contradict this yourself. They're all concentrated in one country. That isn't global. Number of speakers yes. Global.

Lol no. Are there many Chinese spekers in Europe and America? No. Are there many English speakers in China and Asia? Yes It's spoken everywhere.

>they're insinuating china will take over the world

Haha no. Just no.

We're past the age of empires now. There's a reason the European empires have collapsed. Countries can't be aggresive now if they are they're quickly shunned by all those around them. If China started getting aggressive absolutely everyone (USA and allies, EU nations and allies, and I'm sure all of Chinas neighbours wouldn't want them getting to big for their boots, since they know they'll take the hit if they decide to expand their territory).

[Anonymous No.3626276]

>>3626270

[JamesBond !!JAU/DZkp95n No.3626283]

1) There never will be any fission reactors

2) Commercial flying cars won't become a reality in our lifetime

3) You will ALL die

4) By the next 50 years communism will have won stalling ALL scientific progress, unless they discover ways to manipulate the fabric of the universe to get to distant points in space using wormhole like constructs.

[Anonymous No.3626294]

in the next 50 years, democracy will fall, dictatorship will reign once again. Possible racial war, between muslims and caucasians

[Anonymous No.3626303]

>>3626210
Excuse me, sir, but you seem to be mistaken.

Mistake #1: Assuming the language spoken by native Chinese citizens is "Chinese.
-Most Chinese citizens speak Cantonese
-The second most spoken language of the populous is Mandarin
-There exist dozens of other "Chinese" languages, which are, in fact, completely different languages-- not just variations in dialect, although dialect further diverges the distribution.

Mistake 2: Assuming the most commonly spoken language would be Chinese, provided the assumptions leading to mistake #1 were valid.
-There are more Arabic speakers in the world than speakers of any other language.

[Anonymous No.3626315]

>>3626294

Most of the Muslims are Caucasians you uneducated thrash.

[Anonymous No.3626320]

Read "Physics of the Future" By Michio Kaku

Its basically how the world will be in the year 2100

[Anonymous No.3626335]

>>3626219
i have bad news for you...

[Anonymous No.3626368]

>>3625350
>The US will almost certainly become a social democracy
Boy, I hope so.

[Anonymous No.3626370]

>>3626303
>Mandarin speakers, over 1.3 bilion
>Cantonese speakers 100 million

What is this I don't even.

[Anonymous No.3626380]

English is the global language. Not even trolling. The Chinese kids aren't all learning English for shits and giggles.

[Anonymous No.3626383]

>>3626303
There are over a billion mandarin speakers, china actively discourages regional languages and enforces Mandarin(kind of like how Germany educated its people with one variation of German or Russians encouraged Russian to be spoken).

While speaking fluent Chinese is difficult unless you were raised, its the third most learned language after Spanish and French in the US, likewise with elsewhere.

English will still be king though since way more people opt to learn it in China than vice versa.

Arabic is spoken by 300 million people and which has greater variations and will continue to do so due to the lack of unity.

[Anonymous No.3626388]

<Muslims take over the world.>

<Sunnis and Shiites fight amongst each other.>

<Thermonuclear war.>

<Nuclear winter wiping out every last bit of intelligent life on this planet.>

<???>

<Profit>

[Anonymous No.3626398]

>>3626151
Haha, I suppose I do have similar knowledge/beliefs as him about certain things, but he also probably has enough beliefs divergent from mine. I wonder how will my knowledge and beliefs change over the years.

[Anonymous No.3626466]

no black people

[Anonymous No.3626469]

If you think China's double digit growth rates are due to some inherent superiority and they will go on forever you're a retard. China isn't significantly different from other emerging markets, also resource depletion, climate change and overpopulation is going to cause major problems for such a large country.

[Anonymous No.3626487]

/sci/ always bangs on about terraforming mars the moon and venus, what about bloody terraforming earth first?? turn the arctic and desert wastelands into lush rainforests

[Anonymous No.3626498]

>>3626487

how and why.

Within the next 50-100 years it is ESSENTIAL that we get our asses off of this space rock and start making steps towards mining our resources outside the solar system. The greatest threat we face as a civilisation at this moment is scarcity. With population and overall wealth increasing, people are going to want and need more stuff.

If we can't provide we are thoroughly fucked.

[Anonymous No.3626499]

>>3626487
It's someone rational who might not be a teenager! Get him!

[Anonymous No.3626502]

>>3626487
>turn the arctic and desert wastelands into lush rainforests

Because those are actually necessary parts of the larger ecological system and fucking with them is going to cause all kinds of shit?

Also where would you get all the energy needed to heat the arctic land areas?

[Anonymous No.3626503]

http://www.futuretimeline.net/

This is pretty good if you want a decent prediction of the future, scientists and experts contribute to this site so it seems pretty legit

[Anonymous No.3626507]

>>3626498
that done be retarded son

[Anonymous No.3626510]

>>3626502
>Because those are actually necessary parts of the larger ecological system and fucking with them is going to cause all kinds of shit?
Now you're just assuming that we live in the best of all possible worlds.

Not that guy, and I agree that there's always unintended consequences, but once we get our shit in order there are improvements to be made.

[Anonymous No.3626513]

>>3626498
Dude, we need to deal with the sustainability problem here and now, not pretend that we can solve the problem by mining asteroids.

Besides, global population is going to peak and go into decline in this century anyway.

[Anonymous No.3626512]

>>3626502
Where would you get the bloody energy to transport billions of tonnes of material millions of miles through space just to turn Mars into a life supporting zone?
But to your first point you are probably right, I was just going on the fact that the rainforest is the most biologically diverse area on the planet, I am sure there is reason to your argument, perhaps if you expand a bit more?

[Anonymous No.3626514]

>>3626503
all of my rage dedicated to that shit right now

[Anonymous No.3626520]

>>3626513

It will, but ~10-12 billion people is a lot to feed, clothe, provide electricity for, transport, education, entertainment and so on. Assuming ofcourse Africa doesn't stay a shithole forever and all of China will achieve western standards of living, possibly India afterwards. Those two alone comprise such a large percentage of the people on this planet that resources are surely going to be a problem.

How would you want to deal with the sustainability problem if resources are very much finite? You can't make everything out of potatoes and lettuce you know.

[Anonymous No.3626526]

>>3626498
Well we are discussing future technology and I am only at just below degree level knowledge of physics let alone the genius insight into biology and chemistry to even begin to answer that question.
It is also ESSENTIAL in the next 50 to 100 years to make sure we dont turn earth into an infertile uninhabitable desert

[Anonymous No.3626530]

>>3626520
>but ~10-12 billion people is a lot to feed, clothe, provide electricity for, transport, education,
That's why it will decline. Population decline means people gonna die, from starvation, disease from high population density + medicine resistance, lack of shelter whatever doesn't matter. The point is the humanity can't breed itself to extinction or any such thing. We'll always oscillate about equilibrium.

[Anonymous No.3626534]

>>3626526

>"It is also ESSENTIAL in the next 50 to 100 years to make sure we dont turn earth into an infertile uninhabitable desert"

While that estimate is pushing it a bit it's also an argument for moving mining outside the solar system as well, it's very dirty business. Anyone who thinks we're going to solve -anything- with wind power (let's not even discuss solar, inefficient bullcrap not worth the money), they're delusional. Nevermind hydro either.

[Anonymous No.3626535]

>>3626514
sorry..

(couldve pretended to be trolling but didnt)

[Anonymous No.3626540]

>>3626530

With very real danger of conflict and propelling the planet as a whole into a dark age. No thanks.

[Anonymous No.3626557]

>>3626540
Planet as a whole? nah, there's always some people better off than others, you don't send the planet as a whole into dark ages.

[Anonymous No.3626564]

>>3625098
>secular humanist moralfags
Jews won't, they've lasted this long I don't see that changing
>all meat/protein cultured
Yep, but just the meat, no growing just the chicken wing, that has things like bone and ligament, we'll be growing just pure meat
>extract resources/string theory
Don't know
>We will be posting in Chinese
Don't see this happening.

[Anonymous No.3626569]

>>3626557

Economies collapsing, major civil unrest, at worst conflict. I can see that going the wrong way, especially with the modern day tech we have to kill eachother.

If people are starving or being withheld from what are now considered rights due to the cost of overpopulation and the like they're not going to sit still quietly and die.

[Anonymous No.3626570]

>>3626530
No. You've got it all wrong.

Population decline predictions are based entirely on declining total fertility rate. People are having fewer children as countries modernize. Some first-world countries are already in population contraction. We're not talking about starvation or plagues.

[Anonymous No.3626581]

>>3626570
What are you on about son? the population density of most world cities is already beyond carry capacity. plague is a foregone conclusion at this point.

[Anonymous No.3626582]

>>3626564

I'm eagerly awaiting the moment in which I can wrap my teeth around a nice, juicy KFC hot wing which has no bone whatsoever. Oh god delicious.

[Anonymous No.3626583]

thanks to you faggots i went ahead and got this stuck in my head for the rest of the day:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tLTb4P1HD8

[Anonymous No.3626586]

>>3626530
Malthusianfag detected. Really now? If you look around, you might notice that the world's lowest birthrates are in well-developed countries. Humans don't just breed until there's no food. All the world's remaining growth is in the developing countries, and their total fertility rates are declining as they develop as well.

[Anonymous No.3626593]

>>3626581
>What are you on about son? the population density of most world cities is already beyond carry capacity. plague is a foregone conclusion at this point.
All I'm telling you is that the predicted global population peak has nothing to do with starvation or disease. In fact, those would PROLONG population growth.

Sure, whatever you argue the true "carrying capacity" is we're probably beyond it, but the population decline is set to happen anyway, no wars or plagues or starvation required.

[Anonymous No.3626597]

>>3626534

or slapping carbon tax on everything
or heightening the price for energy

global warming is real but the green movement behind it is retarded.

[Anonymous No.3626608]

>>3626593

rich oil sheiks in the ME still get like 30 - 40 kids a piece. It's not just the level of sophistication a society has reached but culture as well.

Besides population estimates vary wildly. Nobody can really accurately predict what its going to be around 2100. Personally I can see us going 10 billion+.

[Anonymous No.3626618]

>>3626608
> Personally I can see us going 10 billion+.
The best data I can find puts us at a peak of about 10 billion shortly after 2050. It mostly depends on how quickly the remaining developing countries modernize.

[Anonymous No.3626627]

>>3626618
>>3626608
Also, I agree about the culture issue. But the trends for what decreases total fertility seem pretty standard worldwide. The most cultural one I'm aware of is the status of women - whether they receive education, whether they are permitted access to birth control, general women's rights, etc.

Other major factors I know of that are less directly cultural are infant mortality rates, standard of living, general education level, etc.

[osthoro No.3626707]

I DISAGREE
In the future, there will be no apocalyptic nuclear war. However, the evolution of melee weaponry will advance exponentially. Lightsaber technology will arise, but it doesn't end there. A gunblade will be formed from the lightsaber which will allow for close to mid range skirmish. Anti-gravity field generators will render mass-propulsion and laser-based weaponry useless. All ballistic weaponry will be rendered useless by missle redirection technology which will divert any and all thermonuclear ballistic missles to the sun. Strategic warfare of the future will involve soldier formation and ranks with double gun-lightsaber messerschmidt soldiers in the front with single lance-gun-lightsaber soldiers on ducati motorcycles to flank. All weaponry and motorcycles will be made of hard heat-resistant plastics so as to combat magnetic field generators.
The world will form a one world democracy, which will slowly evolve into a global empire. Life will be valued, so all inanimate organic entities will be given life through genetic-engineering. Broccoli will now be considered a creature in its own phyla. It will still be harvested for food. Energy to Mass conversion will be discovered, so all resources will come from a nuclear fusion power source. It will be discovered that atomic structure is actually recursive, and that every particle is made of smaller particles to infinity. English will become the standard planetary language, with all other languages existing only to maintain culture. Earth's troposphere will be filled with dust left behing during the age of the machine and the Matrix™ construct.
The new standard of beauty will lie in the amount of dust on a woman's face and body.

[Anonymous No.3626757]

>>3626707
Predicting military technology is probably the hardest to predict, so I wouldn't bother, but in the end it doesn't matter. No matter which means we use to kill eachother the base principles have never changed and never will.

[Anonymous No.3626774]

>>3626707
I smiled.