What are your expectations for 2022?

[semme]

freedom


i wonder what the technology is capable of..

[tds]

by then china rules!

and am no chinese citizen

[Bob]

Increase in technology.

Changes in climate.

Changes in cultural makeup of the United States.

Increase in environmental friendly products, like cars -- more electric and hybrids.

Significant change in the internet.  More connected.

At least some kind of "world" conflict.  Could be with China, North Korea, or a few of the countries in the middle east battling each other -- like India, Pakastan, and Iran.

Continued exploration of space -- I think we'll get something up on the moon or a mission to Mars with people.

More development in nanotechnology, genes, cells and all the following arguments about health and what it means to be human.

[leahcim]

I'll sell the flying car I got in 1990, get a golden clock from the 3 day week job I've been doing, and remove all the jam and peanut butter from my CDs [They still play of course!] before selling them on Ebay and then retire!

[prometheus]

Energy and all products that require a lot of energy will be 2 to 3 times as expensive, making it impossible for most people to afford. This will change the way of life and may even refute the whole industrial revolution.

Some parts of the world will flood, either permanently or semi-permanently.

Religious nuts will get worse. Same with new age spiritualism.

After oil becomes too expensive the US will give up on the middle east. The lack of interest of the west in general will move the aim of fundamentalist islam away from the west. Hard to predict some more.

China will provoke the US or the US will provoke China. Hard to tell if they will be foolish enough to have a real war. Probably not. But maybe that is me being optimistic. Since both of them are going to be in equal power neither will gain from war.

Farmers will have to adjust their farming. Both to the climates and to the lack of energy, pesticides and fertilisers. Food will become simple again. Especially in the really big cities.

Citizens in some European countries will punish their governments for trying to create laws that advocate big businesses at the expense of the lower class. Or maybe not. It will be an issue because some Europeans will want to follow the US and Asia in the economic war.

Of course technology will increase. But the field of interest will be to make things cheap, efffective. We won't see much new fancy things appearing in our homes.

A lot of businesses will go out of business because their marked has become obselete.

European countries will no longer be able to substain their elderly with the high standards they have now.

With the lack of transportation of goods globalization will be reverted in some fields. Maybe this will change the control the west has over economies of third world countries. Maybe the trade restrictions the US and the EU have to fight each other and that actually totally cripple the chances of third world farmers will change.

Multinationals will get less rights in Europe. Intellectual property will be changed. Copying will no longer be viewed as stealing.

Mass production of animals will be put under pressure because they inhibit the development of dangerous virusus.

Nuclear energy will get another chance. But only when people start to feel the lack of energy in their wallet. Before that happens they will continue to resist it.

Airships will return and will be used for goods transportation.

[Dazzer]

driving the latest porsche carrera gt

actually prometheus... talking about nuclear energy... i believe Fusion energy is the energy of the future. Fission is far too dangerous, yes, but Fusion is clean, is efficient, and releases no harmful byproducts whatsoever. Unfortunately, its not a reality . yet.

[thalbergmad]

The 5th age of the sun on the Mayan calendar ends on the 30th August 2012, when the world will end.

Therefore my expectations for 2022 are pretty grim.

[prometheus]

Not in 2022.

You can have a debate on how dangerous fission is. Its not really that it can become a potentional nuclear bomb. Its that you can have radioactivity leaking. In theory something really bad can still happen. There can be an explosion that will spread radioactive material or leak radioactivity but this is fundamentally very different from a bomb.

The big problem is the waste, imo. If we build the best storage facility now the waste will problably be in the open a few thousand years later. Well, the point is that we don't know. If something must be stored for 10,000 years you can never say that the problem is fixed because we have absolute no control over what happens in a thousand years or more.

Our civilization could be whiped out by an influenza virus. Actually a few of them could be whiped out. The knowledge about what radioactivity is may be lost. One could say that these are doomsday scenarios. But it is realisitic. Civilizations don't last that long. Our culture, knowledge, language, everything, may be gone someday. And then an earthquake may break up the waste facility located in a cavern underground. Personally I don't really understand how people can say the waste problem is solved. Or that is it only an issue of money. If you back nuclear power you must admit there is a risk that the waste may cause huge damage long after we are gone. If you ask me if that is justified, that our energy needs to live the way we do is an ample reason to take this risk then the answer is obviously: no.

But I guess it will happen.



Fusion is theoretically an excellent way to generate energy. It has several major advantages over fission. First off, while fission is a chain reaction, the fusion reaction requires very special conditions t happen. If something goes wrong it will stop by itself. The moment the reactor breaks down the conditions will be comprimised and the reaction will cease. Fission can turn out very ugly.
And yes, the reaction itself does not create waste. There is radioactivity invlolved, though. In theory the reactor could still leak radioactivity. But compared to fission this is quite minor. The inside of the reactor becomes radioactive. It also errodes. I think it has to be replaced once every few years, depending on the nature of the reaction and remains radioactive for only 50 years. Its much easier to make sure we can store something for 50 years than for 10,000 years, of course. I am not sure but I think the mass of the waste will be much much smaller with fusion also.

Fusion isn't efficient. Well, I am not sure what you mean. The theoretical reaction is more efficient and much much more elegant. But before the reaction starts off we have to simulate the conditions in a sun. The H-atoms have to be in plasma state so they lose their electron shells, which don't take part in the reaction and would shield the nucleus, preventing the fusion reaction, if they remained in orbit. So this means it has to be very very hot. Then we need very strong magnetic fields to direct the plasma flow. The plasma has to be contained. It is not supposed to hit the outside. Then the particles need momentum, they need to move fast. Then they need to bump in each other, collide and fuse.

To get all this to work requires a lot of energy already. This is not the case with fission, which happens automatically the moment you have enough enriched critical mass. To make the net output of the process positive we need to build a larger reactor. Several small prototype ones already exist. Finally, the countries involved in the research stopped fighting and agreed on a spot to build the new reactor. I think it starts in 2008 or so. So its not really a short term solution. Actually, there are still particle phycisicts that doubt it will ever be efficient.

One could make a case arguing that if all the money spend on nuclear power would have been spend otherwise the energy problem may already be fixed. The money spend on nuclear research is much much more than the money spend to make our machines more economic. Still, most computer and tv could be using about 10% less energy if we spend a few more dollars on some systems that we can already input today. So saving energy this way is a lot cheaper than nuclear research.

Solar energy, bio-mass energy, wind energy, etc all cannot replace oil. We just use way too much. We would need to use about 2/3rd of all the farm ground in the world to grow plants for our artificial bio-mass oil to get all the oil we need. That wouldn't leave much space left for food. Same with solar energy. First off, solar cells already require a lot of energy before they are even produced. They only generate a little bit more than use up in production. So we need a lot of them. There's too little space. I do like building huge solar collectors in space. Sounds like a nice idea to me. But it will be very very costly and still not generate that much energy.

The 5th age of the sun on the Mayan calendar ends on the 30th August 2012, when the world will end.

Why would the world end when a calander ends? My 2005 calander has also ended. The world is still here. If the mayan's thought the world would end in 2012 why don't we find those accounts?

The mayan calender had to end somewhere. Or they would have to write one for another 4 billion years, so their calender ends when earth is burned.

[Dazzer]

actually i don't believe there's any waste. The byproduct of the reaction is Helium, plus ALOT of excess energy from extra elements that wasn't bounded together to make the helium. Radioactivity wise, i'm not sure. But the point of "efficiency" is that it is self sustaining and only requires a supply of hydrogen (deuterium + tritium isotopes). Since, in theory, the plasma would be contained in a magnetic field, there should be no material erosion what soever.

but hey you sound much more knowledgable. i was just putting down my 2 cents

[pianistimo]

i hope the 'desert blossoms like a rose.'  i used to live in the desert and it seems really far-fetched - but not impossible.  so much is depleted.  twould be nice to see people learn about agriculture again - and for the weather to be hospitable to plants growing and thriving.

seeing hunger eradicated.  disease non existent.  children protected.  people happy.  peace in the world would be nice.  i can't say i expect it for 2022 - but it would be nice.  guess that i'm hoping for a miracle.

[prometheus]

Yes, there are no radioactive isotopes produced in the reaction. This is a huge difference. We don't have waste generating radioactivity.

Though of course there is radioactivity involved.

But the point of "efficiency" is that it is self sustaining and only requires a supply of hydrogen (deuterium + tritium isotopes).

I don't understand what you mean by self sustaining. The reaction doesn't sustain itself. Well, it does in the sun but the sun has special conditions. We need the pressure of the mass of the sun before the reaction sustains itself.

The byproduct of the reaction is Helium, plus ALOT of excess energy

This is correct. But what kind of energy is this? Actually, this is radioactive energy. What is radioactive radiation? They are energetic particles. The released energy of the reaction is given to these particles. The He5 nucleus is unstable and splits in a alpha-particle and a neutron. The neutron is very energetic and it can cause ionization of the inner surface of the torus. Since it is neutral it can't be contained by the magnetic field. What happens is that the inner surface is covered with Lithium. Most neutrons will bump into nuclei and fuse. But some will hit the surface and fuse with the Li. In both cases more energy is released, but no more uncontainable energetic neutrons. So I think at that point the plasma can be directed somewhere to heat water, creating steam driving a turbine generating electricity. Now this Lithium will become mildly radioactive. But its nothing compared to fission.

Also, there are alternatives for D-T fusion. Ive heard boron being mentioned. The reaction generates less energy but it has other advantages.

When the magnetic containment field fails, the plasma will leak. (Ok this is starting to sound too much like Star Trek...) But the reaction wil stop. So the building is filled with superheated plasma. I am not sure what the consequences will be. They will probably need to clean up the mess, check for radioactivity. I guess some materials in the building may become radioactive for a year or so and will need to be replaced.

[semme]

is there not that theory out there, that says nature will boost its effiency and prosper when the world is too polluted. it will restore itself and everything is alright again?!
i have no idea if that works, but it sounds like its a good excuse for doing nothing and still having a good conscience..

[leahcim]

is there not that theory out there, that says nature will boost its effiency and prosper when the world is too polluted. it will restore itself and everything is alright again?!
i have no idea if that works, but it sounds like its a good excuse for doing nothing and still having a good conscience..

Yeah, perhaps. But I prefer the newer Google-Forritt theory. Forget string theory or years of study and expensive research. Google-Forritt describes not only the mundane, practical questions of everyday life, but the complex questions we don't have the first foggiest idea about too.

(a) How can I unblock my drain? "Google-forritt states that..."
(b) Which is the best digital piano? "Google-forritt recommends that..."
(c) Nuclear energy, what do you know about it? "Nothing, but Google-Forritt describes it as...."
(d) The world is ending, what are we going to do? It's obvious what to do. Google-Forritt!

The solution might involve expensive, difficult to source suppliers? Not at all. "Search for the best deals on saving the world at Kelkoo" is covered by the first 5 pages of the algorithm's results.

[lau]

I think the rapture would have happend by then

[semme]

Yeah, perhaps. But I prefer the newer Google-Forritt theory. Forget string theory or years of study and expensive research. Google-Forritt describes not only the mundane, practical questions of everyday life, but the complex questions we don't have the first foggiest idea about too.

(a) How can I unblock my drain? "Google-forritt states that..."
(b) Which is the best digital piano? "Google-forritt recommends that..."
(c) Nuclear energy, what do you know about it? "Nothing, but Google-Forritt describes it as...."
(d) The world is ending, what are we going to do? It's obvious what to do. Google-Forritt!

The solution might involve expensive, difficult to source suppliers? Not at all. "Search for the best deals on saving the world at Kelkoo" is covered by the first 5 pages of the algorithm's results.

if this is a joke, i dont get it

[leahcim]

if this is a joke, i dont get it

Google-foritt then

[semme]

ok, its probably because english is not my native language. but i think i got it now

btw, it always takes its time a joke reaches me


hah

[musik_man]

I doubt that oil will be all that scarce by 2022.  There's a huge amount of oil stored in shale in the US and Canada.  The only reason that it isn't set at the moment is that it costs more than pumping the stuff from the ground.  (actually alot of US refineries put work into oil shale during the 70's oil embargo)  The whole running out oil thing is one of those items that gets constantly predicted.

As far as my own predictions, I don't really have any, because they'd be nothing more than guesses.  There was a book in my high school's library that was written in the early 80's.  According to that book, cancer would be cured by the early 90's and AID's by the mid-90's. (looks like we're a bit behind schedule )  I bet if you told people 30 years ago to guess which would happen, we'd cure cancer by the year 2000, or by the year 2000 you could carry your whole music collection in something smaller than a deck of cards, people would've put their money on cancer being cured.  The future is a strange thing.

[prometheus]

I didn't say oil is going to be scarce, since obviously it isn't going to be. I said it will be way too expensive for the uses we have for it.

[leahcim]

I bet if you told people 30 years ago to guess which would happen, we'd cure cancer by the year 2000, or by the year 2000 you could carry your whole music collection in something smaller than a deck of cards, people would've put their money on cancer being cured.  The future is a strange thing.

Well yeah, but "cure cancer" is probably wrong before you've started.

The ability to prevent, detect, diagnose and treat cancers, the survival rates and knowledge about cancer have probably all improved significantly.

OTOH, 30 years ago I'd have said they would have gone further than portable music devices - it was all flying cars, tommorrow's world and so on.

[Bob]

Diabetes will be cured... by the year 2022...

The United States will still be massively in debt, but no one will bother to collect since they benefit from the US.

something (that won't be called a "war"), some sort of conflict will occur in which one side fights almost entirely by the use of nonhuman, robotic, quasi-intelligent drones. 

I will still be alive.

The state of music will be pretty much the same as it is today.

Someone will continue to predict it is the end of the world.  Do you see the pattern of two's?  2022?  Don't you understand what that means?

The internet will still exist but things will be much more tied together.  What you are reading and typing on now will be considered an antique.  What you are using in the year 2022 still won't be fast enough and things will take their time.

This text will still be accessible somewhere out there.


2022 is only 17 years away.  It's not that far off.

[prometheus]

Yes, I forgot about the US debt. Both the state and its people are in huge debts. But actually, I do not know how that will work out since I am not an economist. Actually, most economists can't predict anything.

About curing diseases. Malaria can be cured. But still it's the no. 1 killing animal(both parasite and carrier are animals). I guess Aids will catch up at some point but of course that's a virus. Also, aids can practically be cured. You can prevent getting HIV and once you have HIV you can make sure the person doesn't get Aids. But of course the deaths Aids causes will grow exponentially towards 2022.

But cancer is a bit different. It's a rich people disease. I think though most cancers will be cured in 2022 it will still be a prime disease. Once people get older and older because all diseases are cured the risk of cancer will increase. If you can cure cancer then maybe a person will get several different cancers. A person will have to die somehow. And because of the subtle nature of the disease I don't see it elegantly cured or prevented. The ways cancer is cured now is very harshly. Just destroy cells and hope it kills off enough cancer cells to kill off the tumor. If this treatment is used a second or third cancer and it either will not work or it will not be worth it. I guess the moment cancer cure rates go up the question is if cardiovacular problems kill off the person before she or he manages to develop another cancer.

Diabetes, hmm, the nature of this disease makes it easier to cure than cancer and cardiovascular diseases. It is a genetic defict. It is a hormone problem. Maybe in 2022 it will be cured, yes.

These predictions are funny. Look at old Star Trek. They had all these flashy ideas of teleporters and warp drives, antimatter reactors and mobile fusion reactors. But they didn't even manage to predict things like cell phones and computers with elegant interfaces. And in the later series they use this stupid 'combadge idea'.

[Bob]

Star Trek had something like a cell phone didn't it?

[leahcim]

Star Trek had something like a cell phone didn't it?

I'll just scan it

"Interesting captain, it's a pulse-code modulated signal that appears to contain some kind of message....it's encrypted with a primitive cipher like those used on Earth in the 21st Century"
"Can you decode it?"
"Yes, Captain, but I'll have to press the orange flashing button here.. and look pensively at that bank of flashing lights for a beat.."
"Make it so..."
"Captain, apparantly. u hv wn a lttry m8. Txt ur details to clm"

[pianorama]

2022 is only 17 years away. Think back 17 years ago, to 1989. Yes, technology has improved greatly since then, but nothing radical. (well, nothing I can think of anyways.) Take cars, for example. They still have 4 wheels and still travel on the ground, but they have gotten sleeker, (for the most part), and smaller too. Think of smart cars. They didn't have teeny tiny cars like that in in 1989. (or did they? I wasn't born yet then, but I'm pretty sure they didn't). Anyways, I think most diseases will be less common, unless avian flu spreads and kills millions, and everyone focuses on that. Maybe some houses will have finger-tip recognition locks, though we probably won't be having flying cars and whatnot until at least 2080's or so. We will still have internet, but it will probably be quite different, to keep up with international happenings and information. We will probably we more connected internationally. There might be a war between the U.S. and China. Space exploration will expand, and someone or other will eventually send a man (or woman?) to Mars. Space trips to the Moon will be more common for physically active wealthy people, not just people like that billionaire who went as a tourist to the Moon. (I forget his name) Trips will probably be between $200,000-$1,000,000 rather than the 10's (or 100's?) of millions of dollars, depending on inflation rates.

[etudes]

2022 - Lang Lang or Yundi Li - Beethoven cd.....(maybe)

[pianorama]

Oh, and with the U.S. enormous debt, the American dollar will drop and the Canadian dollar will be higher again. Go Canada!

[princessdecadence]

Sing like Tori Amos

[perfect_pitch]

I want to perform Rachmaninoffs 3rd Piano Concerto with a Decent Symphony Orchestra (Not like WASO).... I'm talking about the London Symphony Orchestra or something.

 

[Bob]

At the very least, I see progress and development.

Also, I don't think 2022 will look the same as now.  It will be a different time just like twenty years ago was fairly different.

[Bob]

What was different twenty years ago?

You will be older.

We may have different styles of clothing.

There will always be fads.  TV shows and movies.  The celebrities will be different.  The young ones now will be older.

We will have gone through more world leaders.

I think the piano will be essentially the same.  The acoustic one.

There will be an entire generation of people who have not yet been born now.  They don't extist right now, but they will in 2022.

Social security.  Medicare. 

We would be 1/5 of the way through the century.

You are bound to meet new people and lose contact with people you know now.

I wonder what pop music will be like then.  Will today's pop be an "oldie?"

Everyone you know now will be twenty years older.  Unfortunately, they won't all be there in 2022.   And any pets you have now... twenty years is a long life for them isn't it?  Sad.






But life will go on I imgaine.

[clef]

intergalactic relations (erm...no), flying cars (maybe) self driving cars, renewable energy, super quick internet, moon colonies, man on mars, holograms, robots.

well yes thats about it

[pianorama]

intergalactic relations (erm...no), flying cars (maybe) self driving cars, renewable energy, super quick internet, moon colonies, man on mars, holograms, robots.

well yes thats about it

Pretty futuristic for just 20 years. It would be weird if you were right though.

[Bob]

What will Piano Street be like in 2022?

[etudes]

What will Piano Street be like in 2022?

well.....i think at that time etudes and paris are already married.

[Bob]

In 2022...

The internet will look much different. 

So will computers.  Size won't be the issue.  There will be more than one kind for certain purposes.

We will have much less privacy. 

[semme]

i think exept some newer technology, and some newer cars, ther is not much change. i mean, are we living in 2006 or 1990 - 2005 mixed up together. the gap will be bigger and bigger. thats why i dont like the scenery of movies like "the island". its only 2016 or something and as a matter of fact, ther are ONLY cars from that year or that knowledge. unrealistic! dont we see cars from all years driving around... things like that.

[soliloquy]

1984, A Clockwork Orange and Soylent Green will be outdated.

[Bob]

Increased use of gene and cloning.  Maybe even something in humans -- because afterall, if it's possible, there will be a way to save lives so someone will pursue it and someone will take the risk to actually try it. 

[beginner_ben]

2022 is only 17 years away. Think back 17 years ago, to 1989. Yes, technology has improved greatly since then, but nothing radical. (well, nothing I can think of anyways.) Take cars, for example. They still have 4 wheels and still travel on the ground, but they have gotten sleeker, (for the most part), and smaller too. Think of smart cars. They didn't have teeny tiny cars like that in in 1989. (or did they? I wasn't born yet then, but I'm pretty sure they didn't). Anyways, I think most diseases will be less common, unless avian flu spreads and kills millions, and everyone focuses on that. Maybe some houses will have finger-tip recognition locks, though we probably won't be having flying cars and whatnot until at least 2080's or so. We will still have internet, but it will probably be quite different, to keep up with international happenings and information. We will probably we more connected internationally. There might be a war between the U.S. and China. Space exploration will expand, and someone or other will eventually send a man (or woman?) to Mars. Space trips to the Moon will be more common for physically active wealthy people, not just people like that billionaire who went as a tourist to the Moon. (I forget his name) Trips will probably be between $200,000-$1,000,000 rather than the 10's (or 100's?) of millions of dollars, depending on inflation rates.

you just sound so smart for being 12 years old! or maybe i am just dumb 

[e60m5]

I better be married. 

[pianistimo]

if murphy's law proves everything - the way to get married is to act like it doesn't matter a whit to you.  (don't know why this attracts girls - but try it).  in fact, try to get rid of them but not as much as 'larry the cable guy,' ok.  if they can take the real you - and your foibles as well as your strengths then you'll probably enjoy a long relationship.

[Tash]

I better be married.

i'm right there with you!!

ok, so if we're both not married by 2022, will you marry me?!!

[pathetiquegirl]

sit on a beach drink an import......go ski diving and get killed doing it.  sounds romantic!

[e60m5]

i'm right there with you!!

ok, so if we're both not married by 2022, will you marry me?!!

Yes, most definitely!  Backup marriages are wonderful. I'll be in Sydney this summer (working at Blake Dawson and Minter Ellison) so we can discuss the provisional pre-nup. 

[Tash]

excellent, yes i'm all for backup marriages, i was engaged to a friend for a while (we decided if we weren't married by 40 we'de become lesbians) except i don't think that's going to work out so this is good!! what's blake dawson n minter ellison? sounds rather fafa

[e60m5]

excellent, yes i'm all for backup marriages, i was engaged to a friend for a while (we decided if we weren't married by 40 we'de become lesbians) except i don't think that's going to work out so this is good!! what's blake dawson n minter ellison? sounds rather fafa

Blake Dawson and Minter Ellison are two of the largest law firms in the Asia-Pacific. Sorry darl, your backup husband is a lawyer...

 

*runs*

But I do have a nice piano that you can play on!

[jas]

1. I hope that by 2022 I'll have finally got around to taking driving lessons and throwing out all the clothes that I don't wear. But I think that's a bit ambitious...

2. I hope that there will be a Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy scenario in place whereby those who rule don't know they're in charge, and therefore can't become arseholes. Again, maybe slightly ambitious. Almost as unlikely as no.1.

Jas

[Tash]

Blake Dawson and Minter Ellison are two of the largest law firms in the Asia-Pacific. Sorry darl, your backup husband is a lawyer...

 

*runs*

But I do have a nice piano that you can play on!

wow nice work getting that!! that's ok, i can deal marrying a lawyer, cos you play the piano and are asian thus we will have good looking children hahaha;)

[e60m5]

wow nice work getting that!! that's ok, i can deal marrying a lawyer, cos you play the piano and are asian thus we will have good looking children hahaha;)

Wooo! Sounds good to me. 

But seriously, I'm in Sydney this summer, so we can chill out sometime if you'd like.