Skip to main content

Three Scenarios of the Future

About two years ago, in 2003, The Brian Lehrer show asked listeners to send in three scenarios for the future, and I, along with many others, e-mailed Brian's show with our predictions. Although I hate to admit to having been wrong, it's obvious that my negative, dystopian vision is the scenario that triumphed. In my defense, the style that it was written in is somewhat tongue-in-cheek, and that it expresses more optimism than an actual prediction.

Utopia:

The US population realizes that the Republican agenda only serves the wealthy and connected, so everyone votes for the Greens. We become a humane and educated civilization, focused on ridding the US of its evils, as well as working toward a more equitable society for all.

Dystopia:

The Republican agenda becomes deeply ingrained, and besides US conquest of the world, the Bush administration formally implements a special incentive for economic growth - no taxes for the wealthy - amnesty for any CEO convicted of a crime, and classification as treasonous any criticism of the present administration.

Reality:

The US population realizes the folly of the Republican agenda, its militarism and money-serving ideology, and proceeds to bypass major media and moneyed interests, to replace the Republican agenda with one more equitable and productive.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Behave: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst by Robert M. Sapolsky My rating: 5 of 5 stars I finished reading this crying. It is a work of neurobiology, social science, anthropology, and history, but ultimately it is a work of great humanity, suggesting ways that humans, our groups, our systems, and our societies can be made better. View all my reviews

A Journey — if You Dare — Into the Minds of Silicon Valley Programmers

My responses in a NY Times comment section for the book, Coders: The Making of a New Tribe and the Remaking of the World by Clive Thompson : #1 - Link Although I've been a software developer for 15 years, and for longer alternating between a project manager, team lead, or analyst, mostly in finance, and now with a cancer center, I found it funny that you blame the people doing the coding for not seeing the harm it could cause. First, most scientific advancement has dark elements, and it is usually not the science but how it is used and sold by business people that is the problem. This leads to the second problem, in that it is not coding that is in itself problematic, but specifically how technology is harnessed to sell. It is normal and desirable to track users, to log actions, to collect telemetry, so as to monitor systems, respond to errors, and to develop new features, but that normal engineering practice has been used to surveil users for the purpose of selling. Blaming

Don't learn to code. Learn to think.

A response to  Don't learn to code. Learn to think. : Below is is my usual response when I see an article stating that everyone should learn to code:  Rather than programming, it is more important to impart the thinking of computer science (CS) than a specific implementation. Programming can be an end point for some students, but it is likely that programming itself will be increasingly automated, so that one needs more the general concepts common in CS. Even then, programming itself is to some degree a grunt task that one progresses beyond:  The following are typical components of a CS degree: algorithms & flowcharting systems thinking logical systems and set theory object-orientation & patterns probability, statistics, mathematics All of the above can be useful in an increasingly automated and data-driven world.