Live data from Hacker News

What the world will be like in a hundred years (1922)

loc.gov

201–210 of 659 posts

Re: What the world will be like in a hundred years (1922)

#201
post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that: > I'm sure that technological advancement in 2022 will be amazing, but they will be nothing as amazing as the present day than it is over 100 years ago (i.e. 1822). I don't know about that statement.

If you think about what they didn't have in 1822 that they did have in 1922: - Radio - Movies - Motorized Rail Transit - Airplanes - Blimps - Recorded Audio - Electrification (esp. lighting) - Telephony - Cars - Subways - Fax - Early Television - Telegraph - Skyscapers - Underwater tunnels - Air Conditioning - Elevators - Modern Hospitals - Machine Guns, Tanks, Dreadnoughts and other tools of modern war - Stock Ticke…

This exact prediction was made in the 1922 article.

Re: What the world will be like in a hundred years (1922)

#202
post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Citation very much needed.

You can read the “Great Reset” book to get a wider view of their vision. They’ve been talking about this for a long time https://www.salon.com/2010/12/06/america_collapse_2025/

Trading that article, I wonder if you are conflating prediction and desire for something to happen.

Re: What the world will be like in a hundred years (1922)

#203

It's interesting to compare this to the WEF future projections: https://www.forbes.com/sites/worldeconomicforum/2016/11/10/s... Especially with regards to this passage:: "In 2022 [economic development] will be as finished as it is to-day in England. American wealth will then be either developed or known, and all of it will belong to somebody. There will be no more opportunity in America than there is in England to-da…

> They will have rebelled against long hours; the chances are that in 2022 few people will work more than seven hours a day, if as much. honestly, with remote work, seven hours a day seems about right. A lot of that isn't even lost productivity, it's cutting back on the general time overhead of working in an office. I don't think that Americans are so prosperous that we've become less enterprising due to class immobi…

>honestly, with remote work, seven hours a day seems about right.

This is, with the most possible respect, a position of great privilege. Most people in the US are not remote workers that get to work 7 hours a day. They are expected to be physically present doing things like retail service work, manufacturing, healthcare, construction, etc.

The average HN user is in a very specific demographic that has benefited enormously from recent economic trends, a benefit that is not distributed evenly. Many (most?) people are working more then they ever did for an increasingly smaller piece of the pie.

Re: What the world will be like in a hundred years (1922)

#204

I was fascinated to read about the predictions of communal-living skyscrapers with their own management, etc. Eerily similar to the Hab Blocks of Mega City 1 I then came to horrifying realisation that 1977 (when Judge Dredd first appeared) is only 55 years after the article, and now 45 years behind us(!!!). More or less halfway. Totally reasonable for them to have read this article, and still been far enough away fro…

And now we have Charlie Munger gleefully making faceless, windowless monoliths a reality.

Re: What the world will be like in a hundred years (1922)

#205

When he mentions the lack of cables, he's pretty close with most of them being underground. But also he's incredible close if you consider the mess of cables that was the Stockholm telephone tower, functioning until 1913 https://www.amusingplanet.com/2017/09/the-stockholm-telephon...

That's wild, thanks for sharing. I'd have to imagine it's served as some level of inspiration for Simon Stålenhag's work.

Ex: http://www.simonstalenhag.se/bilderbig/by_procession_1920.jp...

Re: What the world will be like in a hundred years (1922)

#206
post #33

This is surprisingly accurate, reserved and balanced through the lens of society as well as science. I was expecting something more fanciful like flying horses or whatnot.

Except that: > I'm sure that technological advancement in 2022 will be amazing, but they will be nothing as amazing as the present day than it is over 100 years ago (i.e. 1822). I don't know about that statement.

That is one of the most accurate statements of the whole article!!!

Re: What the world will be like in a hundred years (1922)

#208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Welcome To 2030: I Own Nothing, Have No Privacy And Life Has Never Been Better Let me translate “you are slaves and you rent everything. We base your ability to purchase on a social credit score. But we let you rent houses in our artificially limited VR world.” I don’t make much of predictions like these. It’s ALWAYS a safe bet to assume people will lose liberty. To the point the FED was created in 1913, research w…

Central Banking has been one of the most powerful and liberating achievements of civilization. And you now have the 'freedom' to strike and sue your employer, women have the 'freedom' to actually have a job, you have the 'freedom' to attend college which only about 5% did at the time, you have the 'freedom' to do almost anything in life. And what 'freedoms' have you lost? Well, there's more taxation. And you have to…

> And you have to sell your car to a Black man if he wants to buy it from you.

Never thought about this before: Suppose I’m Black, respond to a Craigslist ad for a $10k car for sale by owner, and am refused for my skin color. What law do I or the state prosecute the seller under?

Most of the anti-discrimination laws I know of apply to companies, usually companies with more than N employees.

Re: What the world will be like in a hundred years (1922)

#209
post #58
post #15

>Similar reforms apply to cooking, a great deal of which will survive among old fashioned people, but a great deal more of which will probably be avoided by the use of synthetic foods. This is very interesting especially if you think "synthetic foods" not just literally but as take out, processed products and such. I know a lot of young professional people who technically never cook. Like almost never and whatever th…

> This is very interesting especially if you think "synthetic foods" not just literally but as take out, processed products and such. I know a lot of young professional people who technically never cook. Like almost never and whatever they have at home is just snacks, if you hungry > order. There are a lot people like these. Anecdata – I'm on of these people. I live in central Stockholm, Sweden, and almost any hour o…

I live in a place were I could easily order / go out for every meal as well. If I cook ~2-3 times a week for myself and box up the leftovers, I get high quality meals for $2-5/meal vs $10-30/meal. This can save ~$8k per person per year just cooking 10 meals a week.

This may not be worth it for some, but I've found the time savings of ordering in/carryout is marginal or actually worse than cooking and reheating leftovers. Waste and grocery trips generally sort themselves out in a couple weeks as you figure out a schedule. This obviously scales with number of people so for a family of 2-4 you'd save $16-32k/yr for little extra effort.

These sort of home economics seem to have really fallen out of favor in my sphere, even in 2+ person households where $40k+ in maintenance/service/food costs can be saved (factor in childcare/education and I image the number can get to $100k+). I don't understand why people leave so much money on the table. There aren't many ways you can make $16k/year for a ---

> That way I don't have to throw out groceries that inevitably go bad because as a single person it's hard to shop just what I need, everything is in large multi packs. Even a loaf of bread will go bad before I'm able to eat it all.

You have to cook larger batches and eat the leftovers. I've had bad luck with bread too tbh. I might just start making my own smaller loafs, because the quality is also just bad.

EDIT: it’s also worth pointing out that savings values are post tax

Re: What the world will be like in a hundred years (1922)

#210
It's always interesting to read these. Everyone assumes that technological progress will continue along the exact same lines as before. And nobody really anticipates the social progress and changes that truly set us apart from 1922. If we assume 2122 will just be the same world with better electronics, that probably wouldn't be very accurate.
Post reply on HN