I’m reminded of a long bet made a number of years ago between Joseph Romm and Greg Blencoe that 1% of car sales in the US would be Hydrogen Fuel cell vehicles by 2015. I’d done a report on this in college and completely forgot about it, probably because hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are near impossible to find on the consumer market. So Blencoe lost the bet and paid Romm the $1000 and wore a T-shirt. He posted a very s…
A 25-Year-Old Bet Comes Due: Has Tech Destroyed Society?
131–140 of 452 posts
Re: A 25-Year-Old Bet Comes Due: Has Tech Destroyed Society?
#132It was an interesting read anyways. The answer should be obvious... "The very fact that his book exists, he wrote, is the equivalent of tossing his cards face down on the table: If society had in fact collapsed, there would be no books, self-published or not. “So let me just admit that I was wrong,” he wrote. “But ... not by much. And not totally.” "
...And not enough to cough up the thousand bucks, the welcher. :-D
In 1995 a person could have bought a US Treasury zero coupon bond for about $130 maturing in 25 years for . . . $1000. No other purchase would have been necessary to cover the bet. Relatively cheap insurance, I think.
Re: A 25-Year-Old Bet Comes Due: Has Tech Destroyed Society?
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wtf? Who cares what the median wage is? People can’t afford health care or housing. Have you been outside in any major city recently? There is a homeless crisis that is truly shocking going on around all of us.
The median wage gives you a picture that is closer to the real value than just anecdotes. For most people on Earth, there has been a great increase in living standards. It just so happens that much of it took place outside of the West.
Re: A 25-Year-Old Bet Comes Due: Has Tech Destroyed Society?
#134It destroyed the average Joe's faith in the average Joe. Now, people are more separated than ever, in their echo chambers, hating each other and firmly believing they are better and righter than the other.
As a counterpoint, I've seen lots of people become more accepting because of the way the internet connects people. If you lived in a rural place before, you likely had very little interaction with minority groups outside of how they were portrayed in media. Now it's possible to interact with all kinds of people and recognize them as people instead of stereotypes. I don't deny that there are echo chambers and major co…
And how precisely does any of these parties benefit from said interaction?
Re: A 25-Year-Old Bet Comes Due: Has Tech Destroyed Society?
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does that work, like how does the connection get made and identity discovered? Generally I feel the echo chamber effect would be more common.
One consumes information online, that information causes introspection and a better perspective of one's identity. Usually it's not one specific event but a bombardment of information that over time, hopefully gives someone more perspective and their place in the world. On the other hand, it closes some people off and causes the echo chamber. Cuts both ways.
Re: A 25-Year-Old Bet Comes Due: Has Tech Destroyed Society?
#136yeah, no thanks. nasty, brutish and short.
Re: A 25-Year-Old Bet Comes Due: Has Tech Destroyed Society?
#137I’m reminded of a long bet made a number of years ago between Joseph Romm and Greg Blencoe that 1% of car sales in the US would be Hydrogen Fuel cell vehicles by 2015. I’d done a report on this in college and completely forgot about it, probably because hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are near impossible to find on the consumer market. So Blencoe lost the bet and paid Romm the $1000 and wore a T-shirt. He posted a very s…
Re: A 25-Year-Old Bet Comes Due: Has Tech Destroyed Society?
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Those weren't the words of the bet, Yes, they were the words of the bet. https://www.wired.com/1995/06/saleskelly/
I don't know if this changes anything but I think the actual bet is described by the line >I bet you US$1,000 that in the year 2020, we're not even close to the kind of disaster you describe—a convergence of three disasters: global currency collapse, significant warfare between rich and poor, and environmental disasters of some significant size. We won't even be close. I'll bet on my optimism. It seems like in the ac…
It would seem to be against the spirit and intention of the bet, in any plausible reading, to grant Sale a win on the grounds that (2) comes true but not (1), when (1) was attempting to paraphrase (2).
Re: A 25-Year-Old Bet Comes Due: Has Tech Destroyed Society?
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
>For most people the economy is not working for them. For most people in the world, they are quite a bit richer than their ancestors, even by 50 years ago. In fact, the number pulled from poverty over the past 50 years is astounding. Even in rich places like the US, the poor today are vastly richer than 50 years ago. Median wages are at all time highs as well. So how do you conclude "for most people" (which I take to…
Wtf? Who cares what the median wage is? People can’t afford health care or housing. Have you been outside in any major city recently? There is a homeless crisis that is truly shocking going on around all of us.
Re: A 25-Year-Old Bet Comes Due: Has Tech Destroyed Society?
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know if this changes anything but I think the actual bet is described by the line >I bet you US$1,000 that in the year 2020, we're not even close to the kind of disaster you describe—a convergence of three disasters: global currency collapse, significant warfare between rich and poor, and environmental disasters of some significant size. We won't even be close. I'll bet on my optimism. It seems like in the ac…
> I bet you US$1,000 that in the year 2020, we're not even close to...a global currency collapse Why would anyone take this bet? If you're right, then $1000 USD probably won't be worth very much after the "global currency collapse", so you'd basically be saying "I'll give you $1000 in 2020 if it's worth anything"
The other (perfectly plausible) answer is that the part of one's brain that believes the claim, and the part of ones' brain that believes in the power of bets and value of money that make bets interesting, are brain regions that haven't reconciled with one another.