I came across this article in Discover, written in 2000. I thought it’d be interesting to see what they got right and where they missed the mark.
Here’s their list:
- “In 2020, you will need to know how to talk to your house. In exchange for this convenience, you’ll share your abode with a horde of circuit-heavy infants that constantly burble to each other and cry out for your care.” They’ve partly hit the mark on this one. We do have more automation, but we don’t yet have a refrigerator that suggests recipes based on what you’ve stored inside, or humanoid robots.
- “You will have to learn to drive a more automated car.” Again, partly correct. Cars today are more automated, with back-up video cameras and automatic braking, but we have yet to perfect a self-driving auto (or that hallmark of the future: the flying car).
- “You’ll identify yourself, gain access to homes and businesses, and board aircraft after a laser has measured the shape of your irises.” Nope. This one’s not even close to being instrumented. You’re more likely to have an all-access card than an eyeball scan.
- “You’ll need to know how to clean up that electronic trail day in and day out.” The article postulated that every new website you visit will result in a barrage of adverts. That’s partly true today, although I still don’t understand how Facebook once targeted an ad based on what a friend of mine was talking about over dinner …
- “With all this new information, you’ll stand a better chance of living well beyond your biblical allotment of threescore and ten. More than 200,000 centenarians will inhabit the United States in 2020.” This is a miss. We’re actually going the other way, with fewer citizens having access to proper healthcare in the US.
- “To reach that age you’ll need to know enough to make more complicated medical choices.” This article postulated we’d have limb regeneration, nanobots, and genetic manipulation. We’re headed that way, yes, but we’re nowhere close to hitting the target.
- “In the future you’ll need to access your betrothed’s genetic map, see what diseases he or she is likely to contract, assess the appearance and health of your children, and perhaps even size up your love’s mental health.” Again, partly true. While we do have DNA testing available, it’s nowhere near the “see what your children will look like,” or “see what diseases you’ll have” stage.
- “You’re going to have to somehow live while you watch a billion people starve.” This article postulated that the third-world countries will basically starve on live TV as the rest of us sit back in luxury. This is only partially true. Sure, there are still people starving, but they’re not just in a third-world country. Here in America, we’ve got more poor people than the system can handle.
- “You will always need to know if the facts you’ve dredged up are accurate and truthful.” Bingo. This one’s spot on, especially with “deep fake” videos so realistic that you can’t tell they’re CGI.
- “By then, you will no longer be a child of the 21st century. If anything, you’ll be an elder, your mind and body augmented, your chromosomes refreshed, flexible computers woven into the four corners of your garments. … your workload will multiply as you bat away each glitch resulting from the increased number of gadgets in your life.” The last is mostly true – at least, I have more trouble the more electronics I acquire. However, the article has anticipated a much faster rise of technology than has actually occurred.
We’ve come a long way from 2000, but it’s not the future yet …
