My husband and I just inherited a box of books from his childhood. One of them (which Dan vividly remembers reading decades ago) is called “2010 – Living In The Future.” It was written in 1972, when he was 2 years old. Looking at this vision of the far-away future (egads! that’s now!), made us laugh hysterically.
The book illustrations include computers looking like HUGE beasts with dials (like our TV sets had back then). The description of the kitchen’s control panel includes the phrase “it looks like a typewriter.” If only there were a reference to 8-tracks somewhere, the imagery would be complete.
Much of it is reminiscent of The Jetsons – machines showering and dressing us, food appearing on conveyor belts just after you order it, etc. (Although there was no prediction of flying cars, which frankly, was my favorite part of the Jetsons.)
A few things have actually happened. They somewhat accurately describe using computers to order things like groceries…except they’re using telephones along with the computer screen to do so. There was no way to envision the Internet! There are not-quite-right, but still close to the idea, descriptions of going to school from home and using videophones. There’s a page about reading and ordering books on a computer screen, which amazon.com recently pioneered with their Kindle.
I really wish the description of airline travel had come true, which is described as being so cheap and prevalent that you don’t need advance reservations, and so fast that you can be in Australia in a couple of hours!
Interestingly, on the heels of “Earth Day” last week, they wrote that all of our dishes would be disposable and simply washed into the sewers. Apparently there was not much of a concern about conservation issues in 70s…and sadly, they couldn’t envision that our oceans would be filled with garbage swirls the size of Texas by 2009. There’s also a mention that “no one is concerned about pollution anymore” because of technological advances eliminating that problem. If only that one had come true!
But I’m also glad that not all of their predictions are a reality. SO thankful that we are NOT all wearing jumpsuits, which is a major theme in the book (along with still wearing 70s hair styles!)
The most disappointing line says “no matter where people work, they will work for only three days a week” (due to the increases in efficiency). How unfortunate that those changes have actually only resulted in everyone working harder, and wanting more, for less! Sigh. I can only hope my kids don’t have 80-hour workweeks when they grow up.
I can hardly wait to see what happens in another 40 years. I really hope we can pay with things using only our fingerprints. I’m sick of all the change in the bottom of my purse.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Carter tried to get the country thinking about the environment, then when Reagan got in, he took down the solar panels off the White House. It would have taken so little and we would be so much better off today. Sad.
ReplyDeleteYeah, life was so much easier when Iran thought it was cool to take our embassy personnel as hostages…
ReplyDeleteCarter was so awesome of a president that Wiki gave him this excerpt in his entry…
The final year of his presidential tenure was marked by several major crises, including the 1979 takeover of the American embassy in Iran and holding of hostages by Iranian students, a failed rescue attempt of the hostages, serious fuel shortages, and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. By 1980, Carter's disapproval ratings were significantly higher than his approval, and he was challenged by Ted Kennedy for the Democratic Party nomination in the 1980 election.
Ultimately, the combination of the economic problems, Iran hostage crisis, and lack of Washington cooperation made it easy for Reagan to portray him as an ineffectual leader, causing Carter to become the first president since 1932 to lose a reelection bid, and his presidency was largely considered a failure.
Wow, an anonymous poster who can cut and paste. Here, this isn't my work, but I offer it up as a rebuttal:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0105/p09s03-coop.html
Wow, a snide, off topic, democratic leaning comment on a blog…what a surprise? Yeah, I know how to cut and paste…did you type in your URL link by hand? You must have time to burn. I guess you didn’t read that my contribution was attributed to the source Wikipedia…“Wiki gave him this excerpt in his entry”. But that’s ok right? All possible denigrating inferences about commentators are fair game on the Internet…right? Thanks for the “rebuttal”…from the OPINION page of the Christian Science Monitor…AWESOME…an opinion about an opinion about an opinion…an obviously politically motivated exercise in historical revisionism used to promote the oppressive Obama regime. How’d those 8 years under Clinton forward Carter’s agenda? Your opinion writer was right about one thing, putting solar panels on the White House was politically tone-deaf. If solar panels were such a watershed of improvement why hasn’t the Obamanator put them back up? Carter was a weak-kneed, politically impotent, nimrod of a one-term president. But thanks to you and other like-minded yahoos like you, we all have in Obama, Carter 2.0. Like your freedom of choice (aka free-market system)? Kiss it goodbye thanks to Obama’s Carter style socialistic agenda. Like your car? You better hope it’s on the Obama approved list. Like double digit inflation? Well it’s coming thanks to all the new debt our fearless leader has signed into law. Like your sweet 1972 jumpsuit…yeah that’s probably coming back into style too.
ReplyDeleteHi anonymous. First, yes I have plenty of time to burn since I was laid off in January, thanks to George W. Bush. No I didn't type in the url by hand, it wasn't necessary. Yes I did read that your post was a Wikipedia entry. And I clearly stated that my "rebuttal" was not MY work. Since you went off on a tangent about Iran that had nothing to do with my point, I felt compelled to offer some alternative facts. And like you, I felt that someone else more knowledgeable about the subject matter was worth referencing. My original point is still valid. If we had implemented some of the energy policies that Carter put forth we would be better off. Yes, we would still be burning fossil fuels, but would likely be a lot less dependent on foreign sources. And what part of the article I cited was revisionist? If you have something that refutes the points the author stated, I'd love to see it. I learned some things about Carter in the article that I didn't know before, for example, I didn't know he was that aggressive about missile defense. Are these facts wrong? Again point me to some other sources, and I'll be glad to study. As for Obama, I'm giving him time. I don't know what's going to happen and neither do you. Is he a Socialist? I don't know, and neither do you. What "free market system" are you referring to? Do you receive Social Security, or will you someday? Then you're a Socialist. Do you receive Medicare, or will you someday? Then you're a Socialist. Are you a farmer or rancher that receives subsidies? Then you're a Socialist. We've had a mixed economy for years. I don't consider myself a Socialist, or a Communist. I enjoy my material goods, and I fully support any business person who can make a buck. But I also understand that there needs to be some safety net for those in need.
ReplyDeleteAll the "new debt" we have, what would you cut from that? And I'm not being a smart-ass, I'm asking. Because as I drive around, I see a lot of bad roads, infrastructure that needs to be repaired. I didn't read the Stimulus Bill, but I have yet to see anybody point out something that I considered to be wasteful. I'm getting extra dollars in my unemployment check, and I'm happy to have it. That was in the Stimulus Bill. Montana (I'm not sure if you live in Montana or not) is getting millions that we need to repair lots of infrastructure. That was in the Stimulus Bill, and we need it, plus it will put people to work. I don't know what's going to happen to the economy, nobody does. Double digit inflation? You know that how? Socialism? An easy word to throw around. I'm waiting to see. I'm enjoying our discussion Anonymous and look forward to continuing. But I'm tired from shoveling snow, so I think I'll go. Oh and if you know anybody that's hiring let me know. Thanks, Casey
Dear Casey & Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteYou both need more Cowbell.
Also, not my work....
ReplyDeleteMORE COWBELL
http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/01/wasting-time-priceless/
Wasting Time: Priceless
May 1, 2009, 1:00 pm
Wasting Time: Priceless
By Daniel Hamermesh
A technical change can raise well-being yet lower G.D.P. I realized this when I spent time watching and re-watching the Saturday Night Live take-off on the recording session of “Don’t Fear the Reaper.”
For some reason I find this Will Ferrell/Christopher Walken spoof hilarious; and I’ve also “wasted” time watching some of the Mastercard “Priceless” spoofs and other such nonsense on the web.
I love this stuff. No doubt it detracts from my productivity as a researcher and teacher, and thus my contribution to society. The same could be said about people who spend time at work downloading risqué or pornographic materials. Productivity is lowered, but their welfare is higher. As a rich society, we should be pleased about this and view it as yet another benefit of technical change, not condemn it because somehow measured output is reduced.
MORE COWBELL....