<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
	
	<rss version="2.0">
		<channel>
			<title>Whitechapel - A New Better Future</title>
			<lastBuildDate>Sun, 26 May 2013 00:58:19 -0700</lastBuildDate>
			<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/</link>
			<description></description>
			<generator>
				Lussumo Vanilla 1.1.4 &amp; Feed Publisher
			</generator>
			<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327788#Comment_327788</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327788#Comment_327788</guid>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Mar 2012 23:44:29 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>oddbill</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Let's get into the weeds on something. We haven't done that in a while!<br /><br />Human space exploration is dead for a couple more generations, maybe longer. We are not going back to the moon. We are not going to Mars. <br /><br />A living personality is too complex and weird to model in code. We are never going to be able to make backups of ourselves. There will never be a matrix.<br /><br />The global industrial culture that is necessary to support machinery as complex and expensive as robotics will never be stable and deep enough to create an environment in which a truly independent AI driven population of artificial beings can grow. There will never be a technosingularity. The machines will never rise.<br /><br />The health of a human body is complex and confounding. Cancer happens, it is not something that can be exterminated. It is a process that is always happening, and sometimes it wins. A million other things go wrong. Health may be improvable, but lifespans will never get much longer than they are now. An extra decade, on the outside, maybe. But people will always get sick, eventually, and they will always die. There is no immortality coming. <br /><br />All of the futures people in our line of thinking have been yearning for are never going to happen. The more we learn, the more scientific prowess we accumulate, the more clear that is. <br /><br />And that is fantastic.<br /><br />People don't think it is yet. They are still crying over spilt rocketships (the first person that whines about their flying car or their jetpack is going to get the eel I had extracted from my arse a while ago and have been raising in an aquarium on a brutal diet of spinefish and drowned idealism). But I can't help but think of this criticism of the singularity I read once, I think on this board somewhere, that went something like:<br /><br /><blockquote >The Singularity? The turning point for justice, when all people bend toward an asymptotic embrace of humanism and love, the pernicious evils of impoverishment and exploitation are rejected, the ecology of the planet is restored to health, and a permaculture of compassionate realism emerges from the whole human race? ... What's that? Oh, you mean cooler toys and longer lives for the rich? Never mind then.</blockquote><br /><br />The cooler toy futures are being revealed as too simpleminded and childishly unworkable. This is good. Santa is fun, but science is better. As illusions fall, a better reality can be imagined.<br /><br />It's long past time to bury the meathooks and talk about what can actually, really be built.<br /><br />What is the real path for optimism? What is the World's Fair future for grown-ups in the 21st Century? <br /><br />What do you think? ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327802#Comment_327802</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327802#Comment_327802</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 07:04:58 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Alan Tyson</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ I think this depends on what scale of time we're looking at. Interstellar travel, prosthetic memory, self-aware computing, all of these things are, I agree, unfeasible in the extreme... within the current century. The 20th century started with the vast majority of the population still using animals as the primary means of transportation, and ended with us using cars, planes, and boats so much that it has actually affected the climate of the entire planet. I wouldn't count Star Trek out just yet. I'm not saying it's likely that that future will happen, but that it's too early to be sure that it's <em >unlikely</em>, either. Anything after about fifty years, I think, is way too far to predict with any kind of accuracy. <br /><br />Within those fifty years, though, I think the really interesting areas to watch for are going to be in the life sciences. Cybernetics, as we've been thinking of them from the 60's until about fifteen years ago, aren't going to happen, but the main thing standing in modern biotech's way is current legislation, and, in the end, technology always trumps legislation. Organs grown from the petri dish upward, computers with organic components, and the ability to predict diseases before they show up. No, we'll probably never have a real cure for cancer, but treatments will improve, and as we get better and knowing when and where that cancer might show up, those treatments will be that much more effective. Same for things like diabetes and Alzheimer's.<br /><br />I have a sister with Type 1 (juvenile) diabetes, which she was diagnosed with at a very early age. I've seen her go from sticking her finger and feeding the blood to a machine not much more advanced than a kitchen thermometer and having to inject herself with insulin from a needle, to having a tiny computer tied into her circulatory system which keeps a constant eye on her blood sugar levels and delivers insulin based on its findings. She used to have blood sugar crashes every three or four months. She hasn't had one, that I know of, in years. That sister, by the way, is currently interning with some of the best medical researchers in the USA. Gives me a bit of an inferiority complex. It also makes me stupidly proud of her. I just write about science. She <em >lives</em> science. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327804#Comment_327804</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327804#Comment_327804</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 07:18:21 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>oldhat</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ @Anchorbeard with your sister, would that be the Animus pump? That thing does wonders.<br /><br />I'm on my way to work, but I will be posting later. Such an interesting topic already. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327805#Comment_327805</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327805#Comment_327805</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 07:28:39 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Alan Tyson</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ @oldhat, I'm not sure about the brand, but I googled it and, yeah, that looks about right! ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327807#Comment_327807</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327807#Comment_327807</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 07:29:57 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Ben Gwalchmai</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ <blockquote >And that is fantastic.</blockquote><br />Agreed.<br /><br />I don't want to predict but instead suggest: within 30 years, governments agree that there are currently too many humans on the planet and that - though no-one will be killed but instead given punitive measures if they have a child - we should just stop breeding for a while. Say 20 years - just 1 generation. <br /><br />[I love kids, really I do, I've worked with them a lot and my nieces and nephew are brilliant but it's really for our own good. ]<br /><br />Imagine if everyone in the world controlled themselves for a while - how much more time would people have to make themselves more optimistic? <br /><br />My entry into the 21st Century's World Fair is:<br /><br /><strong >Everyone on the internet comes to the consensus - we'll control ourselves for a generation.</strong><br /><br />[ETA: I know what you're thinking, 'A generation without experience of children being around? That would be weird and detrimental.' I'd say the flipside: it would be interesting and a learning experience. Also, how many kids would be in adoption after 5 years?] ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327808#Comment_327808</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327808#Comment_327808</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 07:35:01 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>RobSpalding</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ I think the future - as things stand right now without a sudden breakthrough in power generation - lies in the adaptation of the human body.<br />Integrated human-machines, from implanted RFID chips to bionic eyes are where I think we are going.  Mostly because that's where people will spend money.  More people would spend some cash to upgrade themselves than fund an expedition they couldn't go on. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327809#Comment_327809</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327809#Comment_327809</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 07:39:04 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>oldhat</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Ben: As someone who really REALLY wants to have children some day, I disagree with punitive measures taken against those who choose to have children and from a somewhat realistic point of view, I can say that that one will never get past the legislative process. At least not in my lifetime and not as long as the religious family man stays in key positions in the running of a state/province/country. However for population control, I am however in favour of the government giving incentives and tax breaks to those who don't have children as a means of aiding an overpopulation problem. But I wouldn't call a generation where we CAN'T have kids "controlling ourselves" because we're not really. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327811#Comment_327811</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327811#Comment_327811</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 07:52:59 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>KeeperofManyNames</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Hm, not sure I agree that all the things in the big list are off the table quite yet. (At least, I personally am still planning on being immortal. There's too much future left to miss out on all of it.) But working within those constraints...<br /><br />Simple lifehacking takes off in third world countries. People start finding simple, innovative ways of making the tools they need to vastly improve the quality of life. The first world comes to see this as the best way of recycling: rather than breaking down materials, they find ways to modify them into lasting tools (like waterbottle skylights for huts, plastic can handwashing stations, and so on). ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327812#Comment_327812</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327812#Comment_327812</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 07:57:07 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Fishelle</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Agreed with Oldhat about the punitive measures regarding having babies. But one thing government can and should do is get contraception to those who can't afford it, and don't really want children. Better education about contraception and safe sex would be good as well. I hope that there will be a push from the current political climate in this direction. And I wouldn't mind some higher taxes after a certain number. Living in Utah, I know many people who have families that are bigger than they can afford as is. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327817#Comment_327817</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327817#Comment_327817</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 09:23:32 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Ben Gwalchmai</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Robin: You're right, I know - getting it through legislation would be nigh on impossible; tax breaks for people who don't have kids is a great idea, though - nice one! I think I was hoping that everyone who wants a kid would then be able to adopt so how about tax breaks for everyone who doesn't have kids and everyone who adopts?<br /><br />Keeper: I like.<br /><br />Fishelle: agreed, contraception should be free. It is here in the UK and the sex education in place was quite good when I was in school [in fact, my nieces now know more about sex than I did at 11...maybe that's the internet, either way] but unfortunately, we still have a good deal of teenage pregnancy. I'm with you and Robin - <strong >tax breaks for people who combat the overpopulation problem.</strong> [ETA: having realised I set my self up for this one, I'll say 'Official warning: this does not include serial killers.']<br /><br />What say you, Oddbill? Do we get in the fair? ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327820#Comment_327820</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327820#Comment_327820</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 09:43:23 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>oldhat</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ I'd actually like to step back at the commonly accepted "world betterment" theme and would like to address an aspect of the future that not many people appreciate, but I happen to love and even enjoy seeing in Science Fiction.<br /><br />Advertising.<br /><br />It's been pretty cool to see, in my lifetime, the newer and more innovative ways to sell us shit. Even with the little things, where I'm now seeing bus shelters with interactive video displays, entire vacant stores rented out just to showcase and sample a product (Went to a Nivea showcase recently where my skin was tested and I was given free samples based on my skin type), people walking around with wearable service showcases playing and even <a href="http://www.thestar.com/business/article/1144811--sxsw-homeless-hotspots-ignite-controversy-at-startup-festival" >homeless people as 4G wifi hotspots</a>.<br /><br />Hell, I still kind of have fond memories of the early days of smart phones and QR codes, which were originally just a way for Japanese warehouse workers to keep track of shit, just became bigger and bigger. I know everyone hates them now, but to me that was a Cool Thing and a really interesting way to get us to go to and check stuff out in a way that a billboard couldn't do.<br /><br />I'm really interested to see what the future will hold for advertising. Especially when we reach a point that certain technologies can be replicated to meet the demand for advertising at a cheap enough cost for the investment to be worth it. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327821#Comment_327821</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327821#Comment_327821</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 10:01:29 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Argos</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ I agree that we need a massive decrease in population.  Hell, imagine if everyone on earth coupled perfectly and had just one child, the population would be halved within a generation.  But that's not going to happen, not with people like Santorum around who feel like they need to outbreed people from other cultures and religions, and not with uneducated people who don't care to use contraception.  And with all the hubbub going around the U.S. recently over the extremes measures the extreme right is going through to prevent women from getting birth control, I can't see it being given out freely to everyone anytime soon (though I mean really soon, within 5 years). I'm hoping that within a couple decades, though, that will change, and bc can be given out freely to anyone who wants it.  Going back to my "if every couple had just one child" thing, we've already seen with China that that method doesn't really work.  It makes people unhappy and people start killing off their children if they didn't have a boy or whatnot.  But this really is one of the biggest things we see change - an overall decrease in the human population.<br /><br />I'll post back later when I can better formulate my thoughts for other things.  I know I want to see the earth's ecology restored, more sustainable type growth being implemented, and maybe something done with international security & borders so that we don't have these issues were people feel the need to flee countries where they feel their lives are endangered and rush or skip their immigration processes into safer countries, OR make it easier for people to move to different countries (this is a case where an overall population decrease would help.  A country can only allow so many immigrants to enter before it becomes overcrowded from the influx of people).  I want to see something done with immigration reform that eases the process of immigration (for example, in the U.S. a lot of the current undocumented immigrants DID try to immigrate legally, and while they were able to enter legally, weren't offered a way to become a permanent resident.  In some cases work visas expired, in others, people were trying to get asylum but were denied it for whatever reasons), but I also want to see living standards improved in other countries so that people don't feel the need to leave their countries of birth to begin with.  So basically, I want to see an overall decrease in the number of illegal & undocumented immigrants that doesn't involve "more boots on the ground" and electrified moats for borders, because having to live in the shadows as an immigrant without papers just isn't an ideal way for a human being to be living.  I want everyone to be able to be a legal resident of a country in which they feel safe and where they feel they can pursue a healthy and happy life, whether it's because they born in a country where that is possible, or because they were able to legally move to a country where that it possible. <br /><br />Part of it is also that I have that "we're all citizens of the earth" mentality and I really dislike how much borders separate people and restricts us from living in other parts of the world.  One of the things I kept wondering when I was playing Mass Effect was if there were still national borders on Earth in the same ways we have today, or if anyone from earth could live anywhere they wanted on earth since identities were no longer an issue of nationality, but of species (humans vs the other aliens).  I think it would be really neat if people could move freely around the earth without having to worry about visas and immigration processes, though I don't think this will ever be possible because the logistics of governing the earth as a whole, as opposed to divided up into countries, just seems impossible to deal with.  It's wishful thinking, so until that seems possible, I'd just like to see better/easier immigration processes so that people can go wherever the fuck they please, and improved standards of living in poorer countries so that people can feel safe wherever they are born. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327832#Comment_327832</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327832#Comment_327832</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 10:53:37 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>oldhat</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ The combination of the government giving benefits, overpopulation and easier immigration laws got me thinking of the economic side of those things and I think one thing I would REALLY like to see more of is better programs that give incentives to companies who hire more people. At the stage where in right now, when a position goes vacant, the company rarely fills that position anymore and everyone makes do without. This is building up in big and small companies now and a growing population can only make the economic situation get worse. While I know both Canada and the US are making efforts to get factory jobs back in to their respective countries, I would like to see more of an active initiative to make the companies already existing within the countries to feel it's worth it to hire more people. I realize that's a long way off, but hey, it's a dream. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327833#Comment_327833</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327833#Comment_327833</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 10:55:35 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>StefanJ</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ One of my favorite Bruce Sterling lines:<br /><br /><em >"Real futurists have kids."</em> <br /><br />Not "more kids than you can support," or possibly your <em >own</em> kids, but the important thing is, <em >kids</em>. <br /><br />Futurism that is all about charismatic hardware, off-the-wall megaprojects, or sticking your brain in a jar isn't sustainable. You can't limit your engagement with the question of kids by simply saying there are to many of them.<br /><br />We need to make a world where what kids we <em >do</em> have are protected, nurtured,and cultivated. Quality, not quantity.<br /><br />Fighting poverty and disease are a total no-brainer first step toward that.<br /><br />* * *<br />When I want to feel good about things, I read Maker movement web pages. Yeah, there's a lot of stuff there about artsy hipster stuff people are doing with fabricators, but there's also a lot of stuff about "bootstrapping," making tools and technologies for developing countries that fuel bottom-up empowerment. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327838#Comment_327838</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327838#Comment_327838</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 11:35:07 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Jason A. Quest</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ "Imagine if everyone in the world controlled themselves for a while" is slightly less realistic thinking than putting a person on Mars in the next decade.<br /><br />There's a way to fight population growth which doesn't require draconian legislation or wishful thinking: education and security.  In countries with good education systems, and where people don't fear for how they're going to survive into old age, they have fewer children.  No coercion necessary. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327842#Comment_327842</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327842#Comment_327842</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 12:50:18 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>oddbill</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ I'll have a better thought out response later today, but basically yes, listen to Mr. Quest.<br /><br />There is no "overpopulation" problem. I have no idea why people think there is.<br /><br />In any region with a stable government and wealth, population growth is small or actually declining. In regions without stable governments or wealth (I.e. no possible way to enforce any sort of facist population management law) population growth is strong.<br /><br />As wealth and education increase, population growth slows. This is well known. <br /><br />Telling Americans or Canadians or Europeans to have less kids, even if they agreed to, which they rightly never should, would do absolutely nothing to affect the global numbers, or the places where population soars beyond the ability for weak government or infrastructure to support.<br /><br />Plus, as StefanJ points out via Bruce Sterling, it's nihilistic in the extreme. As Bruce might say, your dead grandfather is better at not having kids. It's no use trying to build a future on things your dead grandfather is better at doing right now, being dead.<br /><br />We need to imagine a plausible better future for the living. That by necessity will include kids to grow up and live in it. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327844#Comment_327844</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327844#Comment_327844</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 12:58:17 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Argos</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Well, the thing with population is that people living in countries such as the U.S. where we have really high standards of living use a vast amount or resources.  With 7 billion people on the earth, if everyone were living at those standards, there would be incredible strain on what resources we have, and that's where the over-population thing comes in.  We might not be overpopulated right now, but only because there are people with low enough standards of living that those of us with high standards of living can continue to use resources the way we do.  If we want to bring everyone up to high standards of living, then we need less people on earth to keep that those standards if living sustainable.<br /><br />This issue might also be a matter of perspective.  In big cities in the U.S., they are very crowded but for the most part everyone is doing well.  If you go to a city such as Mexico City, it's very densely populated and there is abundant poverty and crime.  People flock to urban areas to find more living opportunities, and as a result, urban areas become crowded, and if the economy in those places can't support such dense populations, then you end up lots of impoverished people in those dense, urban environments.  Some areas of the world simply don't have the resources to support large populations, and that is something that we are already seeing.  When you don't have the resources to support the population, you have become over-populated. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327845#Comment_327845</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327845#Comment_327845</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 13:05:27 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Magnulus</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ I have a feeling that rather than actual population control of any sort (incentivised or by threat of penalisation) what will happen is an explosion in research into and development of more compact and effective ways to produce food. Though I would love to see all meat eaters turn to "weekday vegetarianism" or full-on vegetarianism to help out with the food issues, I also doubt that we'll find a way to make that happen either. <br /><br />So I have a feeling the kind of stuff that will happen is that projects like the <a href="http://singularityhub.com/2011/08/14/dutch-plantlab-revolutionizes-farming-no-sunlight-no-windows-less-water-better-food/" >LED farm</a>, <a href="http://inhabitat.com/poop-burger-japanese-researcher-creates-artificial-meat-from-human-feces/" >Turd Burger</a>, vertical farms (which are actually now being built not just conceptualised) and lab-grown meat will gain more traction. You can tell people that you're incentivising birth control by giving tax breaks, but (some) people will read it as a War On Families.<br /><br />One interesting idea for population control that I cannot remember where I read (It might have been Blue Mars by Kim Stanley Robinson) is to give each person an allowance of half a child (until the population stabilises). This means one pairing can have one kid, or they can trade their allowance away in return for something else, most likely a cash amount that most likely will have a fluid value. If you are single but want a child, buy some other single person's allowance. It's like Cap And Trade for children! And me and wifeyface would probably not have had a mortgage right now if we had that opportunity.<br /><br />One problem we are already facing in some countries is that there are not enough young people in care professions to take care of the massive amounts of old people. Japan is leading the way already in terms of robotic help for the elderly, and I think this will continue expanding in more areas than care. Exoskeletons to improve human strength by orders of magnitude already exist, Boston Dynamics' PETMAN is starting to look like something out of a Neill Blomkamp short, and AlphaDog is looking mighty impressive as well. Robotics is an area that I believe will see massive expansion in the years to come. And hey, with Robonaut out there, maybe robotics could even help to make deeper space exploration cheaper and more feasible in our time.<br /><br />There's more, but I'm tired so can't think what it is right now, and I need to get up early. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327847#Comment_327847</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327847#Comment_327847</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 13:14:19 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>oddbill</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Edit: the below was in response to Argos, the great post above came in between ...<br /><br />Maybe, or maybe we need to step away from the really problematic stance of saying there should be less people and start dreaming up better ways to live with them with what we have.<br /><br />There are untapped resources in our reach, and our imaginations have been so small in this regard. Were big on fantasy disasters, but we've been negligent of imagining better ways of living in the context of our actual world.<br /><br />Your borders ideas are right in line with where I'm hoping we can find some good vision. People should be able to move around. The world is better when people can move around freely on it. I'd rather see us going that way, than trying to dictate to people whether or not it is desirable that they have a child.<br /><br />A society that rejects reproduction is sick. A society that embraces motion and hospitality is healthy.<br /><br />In a future i'd rather live in, there are lots of children, and people can move around the globe freely.<br /><br />I'll have better thoughts as to how to get there after work today. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327849#Comment_327849</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327849#Comment_327849</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 13:30:02 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Argos</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ I totally get where your coming from, and I agree that JasonQuest's method of just educating everyone is the best way to slow growth.  While I DO think the population needs to go down, I don't want to do it in a way that enforces limits on reproduction (which is not only inhumane, but as I mentioned, as we've seen with China, it just doesn't work), but rather see a culture where birth control is accepted and freely distributed for those who want it, rather than always being condemned as a sin or some product of the devil.  I would like for people to feel safe in their home countries, so that they don't feel the need to have many many children just so that one or a few of them can survive.  These are the ways in which I want to see population growth slow.  Though that being said, there are people who do live in countries with higher standards of living and have, in my opinion, too many children.  My sister's church choir director and his wife have 9 children and want more.  A friend I had when I was younger had about 33 first cousins just on her mother's side because her grandmother had 12 kids. That's a bit absurd, imo.  <br /><br />I would also like to see us approaching more sustainable methods of harvesting resources (which we're already doing, thankfully), for both the sake of the Earth and of humans.  As much as I like futuristic SciFi and cyberpunk cities, I really don't see the loss of any more natural landscapes, and if we could slow the current rate of extinction (we are, no joke, experiencing a rate of extinction that is so high that many ecologists consider us to be experiencing the 6th mass exctinction).  More sustainability not only means we can preserve the Earth, BUT, we will be able to support more human beings, as well.  As Alan Moore says "...what befalls the earth, befalls the sons of the earth. If you spit on the earth, you spit on mankind."<br /><br />edit: I will expand more later when I have actual ideas and not just "I want to see sustainability, hooray!" ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327850#Comment_327850</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327850#Comment_327850</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 13:33:10 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>oldhat</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ I would like to note that my small contribution on overpopulation was meant to be in the context on "if in the future there is an overpopulation problem" not "there is one". ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327851#Comment_327851</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327851#Comment_327851</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 13:48:59 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Alan Tyson</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ A quick idea: Since this conversation is probably going to go in a ton of directions (the future is, after all, a big place, and only getting bigger), maybe we should incorporate a hash system, similar to Ask Whitechapel, to make all this easier to keep track of? Example:<br /><br />#ChildrenAreTheFuture<br /><br />Expanding on the idea of giving tax incentives to people who do choose to forgo having children, I think similar (perhaps even greater) incentives should be offered to those who choose to adopt, and even to those who give children they know they cannot take care of up for adoption. Not adding to the problem is good - contributing to the solution is better. Not very many people will be willing to do this, but some might, if they can be convinced that their child can be raised better by someone of greater financial or mental stability.<br /><br />I make jokes all the time about how people should have to take an I.Q. test in order to reproduce, but that is basically a eugenics program, and that never ends well for anyone. However, the fact remains that, typically, lower-I.Q. parents will give birth to more children. I'd be willing to bet the reason for this is that, with more and more jobs closed off to low-I.Q. parents, in a society that rewards what you know far more than what you've done, these people see the best (maybe only) way to validate their existence and contribute something to the world is to have a kid, or maybe a bundle of kids, even if they are not otherwise inclined to be parents. This phenomenon, then, is a symptom of a deeper problem.<br /><br />Let's not tell people they shouldn't have kids, rather let's make a society where there's more to life than just having and raising kids. Giving as many people better education, and more opportunities to find self-worth other than being a parent, may help ensure that only people who really want kids and are really capable of raising them well will actually have them. I'd prefer 4 billion happy, intelligent, productive, progressive humans to 8 billion depressed, double-digit I.Q., over/underworked, nihilistic humans, but only if we get that number in the right way. A slow, steady decline of the population, eventually stabilizing into a sustainable growth pattern, would be much better than a generation-long full stop of all reproduction. It's the difference between tapping the brakes to slow down your car, and yanking the emergency brake. <br /><br />Again, quality of life over quantity of the living. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327859#Comment_327859</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327859#Comment_327859</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 14:46:11 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>KeeperofManyNames</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ #ChildrenAreTheFuture:<br /><br />Just to play off the ideas about education, stability, children, low IQ scores and their relation to reproduction, and so on, the following video might be worth checking out:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DB_kVIoovJI" ></a><br /><br />It is, if you can believe it, a peer reviewed rap show about how urban crime and urban reproduction rate are related by evolutionary biology to the ability of individuals to self actualize. That's a gross oversimplification, but it might point toward some possibilities for dealing with these problems not as a moral failing but an evolutionary strategy.<br /><br />If I can posit another future development, it would be #EducationReform, which is connected to the #ChildrenAreTheFuture idea. (I'm having way too much fun with this hashtag thing...) We're going to see a full scale collapse and rebuilding of the education system in American and other similarly lagging nations within half a century, I suspect, or at least a pretty serious reworking designed to avoid that collapse. One of those things is probably going to be a reform of sexual education, in particular.<br /><br />Hm, sex is a fairly low-impact entertainment option as well, actually, and as moral beliefs on sex are basically on a trend toward greater sexual freedom I suspect we'll see people naturally embracing sex as a means to pleasure and entertainment that consumes less than movies, video games, &c. (Although that's not taking porn into account and wow did this post get off track quickly.)<br /><br />#ThirdWorldHacks:<br /><br />For anyone interested, the water bottle skylight thing that I mentioned before is real.<a href="http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-09-bottle-brighten-millions-poor-homes.html" > Check it out</a>. I feel like there's some interesting potential here to spread some concrete solutions and technologies like this through the thread, without it taking over the thread entirely. Any objections, Oddbill? ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327868#Comment_327868</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327868#Comment_327868</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 15:30:08 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>oddbill</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ I have no objections to any of this. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327905#Comment_327905</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327905#Comment_327905</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 22:15:59 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Magnulus</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ #ChildrenAreTheFuture<br /><br />Yes, education is important in reducing unwanted pregnancies. Another issue is, of course, child mortality rates in developing countries as well as economical uncertainty. With both of these together, the result is often that people have a lot of children. However, when these are reduced, through Developing countries becoming Developed, numbers of children born tend also to be reduced. My grandmother had 17 brothers and sisters, 11 of which lived to see adulthood. My mother had four siblings, all of which became adults. I have one brother and no children myself thus far. My brother's second has just been born, and will in all likelihood be the last. Now, my family is definitely not underprivileged, but I think it's useful for illustration purposes.<br /><br />#BordersAreForChumps and #ThirdWorldHacks<br /><br />Hans Rosling, that perennial Data Jockey, had a <a href="http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_on_global_population_growth.html" >Talk</a> about controlling population growth by the poorer, developing countries gaining a higher standard of living.<br /><br />Essentially, what we need is a more democratised economy. A more truly global economy. One where a local business woman in Uganda can seek investment for her laundry business from an American investor. One where someone with a great idea for a niche product can go online and seek funding - not from one fat cat but from the actual people who are likely to buy it. Both of these are happening right now. They're happening despite the current economic system, however. I think what we might see happening is a further crash of our current economic system. I truly believe that by the end of this generation, we could see a borderless economy as well as a borderless society that transcends the artificial borders we put in places years ago.<br /><br />Already, we are seeing people engaging with problems on the other side of the world to a much larger extent than before. I remember the coverage of Iran's protests as something unprecedented. This happened thanks to the globalising, democratising power of the internet. Granted, in the end it didn't help them out as much as we could wish it would, but it made us aware. It made us care, and all without any manipulative KONY 2012 campaign, too. The more people get online, the more their problems become our concern. So again: Global economy. Borderless economy. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327913#Comment_327913</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327913#Comment_327913</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2012 00:07:41 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>oddbill</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ #BigEnergy<br /><br />Oh, I want to type more but I am too tired! But I want to inject a hashtag for big energy. As in, the future of it.<br /><br />And to do it completely backward, let me show you this shitty 40 second video that was the best quick summary of Buckminster Fuller's several decades old concept of a global energy grid:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afsgpDLneIw" ></a><br /><br />There is, of course, a <a href="http://www.geni.org/" >bland and uninspiring website of people who are still interested in this concept, but are probably old or weird</a>. <br /><br />The idea is to tie all of the continents' electrical grids together in one massive, multiply redundant, decentralized sort of internet of energy, to benefit from vast economies of scale, as well as planetary sized cyclical demand. The spike in demand should follow the sweep of night. If any significant power were to be generated from solar, the sunny side could power the dark side as long as all of it is connected. <br /><br />Where, at the time, the idea of a globally networked grid that existed as some kind of extranational, unnationalizable entity was maybe a little implausible, we have a very real precedent now.<br /><br />Something like this needs to be part of the next steps, I think. In order to do it, many #BordersAreForChumps problems will need to be worked out, and energy market manipulators will need to somehow be tamed. But if you are concerned about the infrastructure or resources necessary to lift to a more educated, technological standard of living large swaths of the planets population, something like this will have to happen. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327922#Comment_327922</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327922#Comment_327922</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2012 02:19:28 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Ben Gwalchmai</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ #ChildrenAreTheFuture<br /><br />“Development is the best contraceptive.” Agreed.<br /><br />[Edited because I can't seem to make the video both Magnalus and I have linked to not embed]<br /><br />I won't link the videos as they're large but I'd suggest watching from the 7 minute mark of Magnulus' link while keeping in mind that scientists have calculated that 2.2 billion is <a href="http://news.stanford.edu/pr/94/940711Arc4189.html" >the optimum population</a> for Earth to be stable [that article features the words "subsequent shrinkage, is required"] aaaaand, though we're likely to hit 9 billion,<em > I'd just like</em> to see everyone adopt for a generation.<br /><br />However, I admit that I can't stop people wanting to reproduce [though, you know, sperm banks exist so to skip a generation wouldn't exactly be a massive problem] and so I'll change my stance to say this: I think there is a population problem, whoever's in agreement, <strong >let's try to keep the population below 9 billion and eventually get it to about half that before the end of the 21st Century.</strong><br /><br />Again, I should state: <ul ><br />I love kids,</ul><br />I'm going to adopt as many as I can afford to and I wouldn't want a world without kids but 10-20 years without kids being born wouldn't mean no kids at all, it would just mean Primary School teachers have to do something else for 10-20 years. We wouldn't lose the knowledge as the teachers would still be alive and the books would still be there. Then, they could become teachers again. [This is an example that applies to all jobs.]<br /><br />I think that #BigEnergy & #BordersAreForChumps are so linked that if the two were accomplished together [perhaps due to a critical mass (preferably) or a crisis 9not so preferably)] in order to accomplish the goal of #BigEnergy, we'd have an international grid very quickly indeed.<br /><br />As big governments take a long time to agree on these things, I'd love to see an idea I had in 2006 come to pass: groups of an engineer, a doctor, an electrician, a geologist, a communication engineer, a producer/administrator, a communicator/linguist, and an executive who talks with communities and businesses travel from community to community setting up renewable energy in that area. Kind of a #TravellingRenewingCommunitiesTeam.<br /><br /><div id="hide" >[My original thoughts on a #TravellingRenewingCommunitiesTeam came from this - If I could go anywhere, do anything, I'd spend the first year seeing everything that I wont be able to see in 20 years time while finding & contacting specialists in: architecture, biodiversity, fungi, community banking, tech infrastructure, transport infrastructure, language & languages, immediate geographical renewable energy sourcing, irrigation & farming, plumbing, renewable water sourcing, soil testing & rejuvenation, education economies and local social-democracy implementation.<br /><br />Once contacted, I'd supplement my own information and resources with the information they'd given me & the contacts. With enough money, I'd be able to offer their best students or the best people in the field [including themselves if they were up to the challenge] a job as a part of a team that goes to deserted places; lost places that no one has the money, time or patience to bring back to life - worldwide, of course - and we'd bring them back to life.]</div> ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327924#Comment_327924</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327924#Comment_327924</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2012 03:10:16 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>sneak046</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Some fascinating ideas in this thread, wish I could add some more but every time I try to make a comment it ends up coming off more pessimistic than intended. <br /><br />There will be advances made, some of them will be amazing and life changing, but it is not by any means a forgone conclusion that 'progress' is an arrow pointing in the direction we want or hope for. Also Gibson's statement that the future is not evenly spread is an important consideration. <br /><br />Two things I do want to add a note of caution about are that political and social short-termism and self-interest of decision makers that make large-scale cross-border infrastrcture projects at best difficult to imagine, at worst hopelessly out of reach.<br /><br />The second is that I am a fairly cautious about overstating the democratising effect of the internet. Some of the same things were said in the mid C20th about television, after all. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327935#Comment_327935</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327935#Comment_327935</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2012 05:25:30 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Foamhead</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ #NoChildrenAreTheFuture<br /><br /><a href="http://vhemt.org/" >Voluntary Human Extinction Movement</a><br /><br />At least according to this lot, who, a little surprisingly, appeared as a "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voluntary_Human_Extinction_Movement" >Today's Featured Article</a>" on the Wikipedia homepage I get piped through to my corner of the world a couple of days ago.  I'd heard and read about them before but their turning up on WP around the same time this thread was being blinked into existence set-off a quiet synchronicty alert. Plus it kinda reminded me of <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/394986.Nature_s_End" >Nature's End</a> by James W. Kunetka & Whitley Strieber.<blockquote >VHEMT (pronounced vehement) is a movement not an organization. It’s a movement advanced by people who care about life on planet Earth. We’re not just a bunch of misanthropes and anti-social, Malthusian misfits, taking morbid delight whenever disaster strikes humans. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Voluntary human extinction is the humanitarian alternative to human disasters.<br />We don’t carry on about how the human race has shown itself to be a greedy, amoral parasite on the once-healthy face of this planet. That type of negativity offers no solution to the inexorable horrors which human activity is causing.<br />Rather, The Movement presents an encouraging alternative to the callous exploitation and wholesale destruction of Earth’s ecology.<br />As VHEMT Volunteers know, the hopeful alternative to the extinction of millions of species of plants and animals is the voluntary extinction of one species: Homo sapiens... us.<br />Each time another one of us decides to not add another one of us to the burgeoning billions already squatting on this ravaged planet, another ray of hope shines through the gloom.<br />When every human chooses to stop breeding, Earth’s biosphere will be allowed to return to its former glory, and all remaining creatures will be free to live, die, evolve (if they believe in evolution), and will perhaps pass away, as so many of Nature’s “experiments” have done throughout the eons.<br />It’s going to take all of us going.</blockquote>I can't say I subscribe to their way of thinking (most of the time) but this is some people's take on <em >a new and better future</em>. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327954#Comment_327954</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327954#Comment_327954</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2012 08:40:12 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Fishelle</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ #ChildrenAreTheFuture<br />You know another way to fix this problem that should happen but probably won't? Rather than telling people not to have kids?<br />#FindAnotherRock<br />Why <em >isn't</em> space travel, colonizing Mars and all that, something that's going to happen? It needs to happen for our survival as a species if something goes terribly wrong on Earth. How can we fix this idea that space is a waste of money? I want this to happen. So do a lot of you, I think. So how can we as a group of people that believe in the future encourage another space race? ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327955#Comment_327955</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327955#Comment_327955</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2012 08:48:20 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Magnulus</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ I think the idea here is to reject a lot of our favourite SciFi subjects and try to think of new, perhaps seemingly more mundane, ideas for how humanity will change in the next 100 years or so. It's a nice way to tax your creative muscles a bit. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327956#Comment_327956</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327956#Comment_327956</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2012 09:04:44 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Argos</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ #FindAnotherRock<br /><br />I think part of the idea of this thread is that the nerdy, SciFi loving crowd tends to always answer these questions with really advanced space travel that, at least in the next couple generations, won't be possible, so let's talk about some solution that are more tangible for our generation and the next couple generations for a change, something that has to do with changes on Earth and not in space, just as a change of pace.  While inhabiting another rock could be a possible solution at some point, it isn't now, so we're trying to discuss solutions that we can start seeing in out lives and our childrens', because until it does become possible to inhabit another rock, the problem will still be a problem, so we should address it within the limits of our current tools.<br /><br />Same goes for #sustainability, we could just find another rock at some point and use those resources, but until then, and who knows when that will be, we still have the problem of over-exerting what resources we currently have and potentially fucking ourselves over before we can find another rock to use, or fucking up earth to the point where it won't be able to recover while we're still on it.<br /><br />Just because we can fix the problem by going to space, doesn't mean we shouldn't tackle it from home, either.  In fact, I think we might need to tackle it from home before we can fix it by going to space, because space isn't a guaranteed solution, at least not for many, many years.  Who knows how long it will take to find and travel to another inhabitable planet, or to terraform mars.<br /><br />Though I do like your question about how we start getting people to care about another space race, because while the space travel itself might not be possible withing our lives, getting people to care about it is something we can start with.  Currently I have no answers for that, unfortunately. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327962#Comment_327962</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327962#Comment_327962</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2012 09:36:14 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Fishelle</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Fair enough. I guess I was hoping the idea of getting people to care was mundane enough, but I'll try to not get off subject again. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327964#Comment_327964</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327964#Comment_327964</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2012 09:44:54 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Argos</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Oh no, I think that talking about getting people to care is a really cool topic to discuss, I was just saying why we weren't talking about actual space exploration itself.  I think we just have to make sure we don't derail the discussion from, "How do we get people to care?" to "How do we actually terraform mars?"  So maybe instead of #FindAnotherRock, we should go with #StartaSpaceRace (I realize that your original post asks the question of how can we get people to care, and not how to we go about exploring space, but at least for me the hashtag #FindAnotherRock was a bit confusing and made me think you were asking how we could go about finding another rock, until I went back and reread the post). ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327967#Comment_327967</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327967#Comment_327967</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2012 09:59:26 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>oldhat</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ #findanotherrock<br /><br />I was under the impression that this thread was about realistic things we expect to see in the future and I believe that space exploration is a part of that. While I don't believe a warp drive (or a navigation system so we can use it without crashing in to a planet or rock) will be invented in many generations if at all, and while I also don't believe that we'll be seeing much in the way of colonization anytime soon either, what, other than budget, is stopping us from at least exploring some of our neighbouring worlds? What, other than budget, is stopping us from planting another seed of "stuff we now know" in to the soil of the future with the knowledge that us AND future generations probably won't see the flower that seed later blooms? Sorry, but I think exploration is possible. Not in an unrealistic "let's whiz by Andromeda for lunch" way, but in a "Hey, let's put a team of astronauts on mars and get them to take pictures" way.<br /><br />As for getting people to care, I submit to you this video with no further comment:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xhc25v0DpJc" ></a> ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327974#Comment_327974</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=327974#Comment_327974</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2012 11:01:33 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Magnulus</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ I am all for #FindAnotherRock to some extent. There's a reason why I have such a fervent love of the Mars Trilogy. Well, there are many reasons. But the colonisation of Mars in and of itself is one of them. Within that trilogy, though, lies some of my difficulties with this concept: If we can just move to another planet, why fix our problems here? And you KNOW that is going to be a tradeoff of some sort. "No sweat, we'll just keep working on our colonisation/ terraforming capabilities and go to the other planets! Bonus!" Which will of course lead to faster, more efficient space travel, and before you know it, we're the locust-like aliens of Independence Day. Hop to a new planet, rake it empty of resources, hop to the next one. Sure, if we went this direction, we would much more quickly get a space elevator and efficient ion thrusters, etc etc etc, but is it worth the human/ moral cost?<br /><br />I'm putting a massively fine point on this, of course, but my point is that we can't just cut and run. That's not how we've got to where we are now. We survived by tackling problems, often in ways that created NEW problems, but the more problems we tackle, the more we know about tackling the new ones.<br /><br />Ergo #Sustainability. Just imagine how efficiently we could colonise other planets and use their resources if we manage to sort that out down here first? And as we go along, we can #StartASpaceRace as Argos says. More probes, new manned Moon missions, a manned mission to Mars. To explore opportunities and inspire a new generation to push us even further.<br /><br />Space is sexy. Fact. So #StarASpaceRace could actually go hand in hand with getting kids interested in science as a whole again. It might start with "I want to be an austronaut!!" (Do we hear this nearly as often any more?) but it'll end in a diverse set of goals and interests among our kids as they become adults. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=328046#Comment_328046</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=328046#Comment_328046</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Mar 2012 01:05:03 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>nelzbub</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ #global energy grid.<br />thanks to Oddbill for reminding me of this idea which I've always thought to be a sensible way to bring about cooperation between states.<br /> Sadly it seems that as energy grids have slowly become more connected they have provided the opportunity for huge power companies to make like pirates with some outrageous examples of shady business practices and shameless profiteering. The system is maintained on a basis of shareholder profits and thus the benefits take a long time to spread to the wider world.<br />I am very interested in recent developments that would allow change to come from the bottom upwards, for instance I have been excited to read about self contained systems to extract power from sewage, something which has major implications for communities in the third world. Also cheap and easily constructed solar ovens which could be used for both cooking and purifying water could make a real difference to survival rates.<br /><br />And how about this for something that will make a huge difference overnight, would be easily achievable and, I think would improve life in general for all- end the war on drugs. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=328051#Comment_328051</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=328051#Comment_328051</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Mar 2012 01:39:17 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>oddbill</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ #FindAnotherRock<br /><br />The thing about human space travel - there just isn't a good <em >reason</em> for it. I get every reason you will all cite! Exploration! The unbounded spirit of adventure! Species survival (don't keep all your eggs in one basket)! Ancillary technological innovation that bootstraps the species! I know, I know! I want all of that to matter too!<br /><br />But it doesn't.<br /><br />The fact is, small, lightweight, overengineered robots do it better. They just do. It's like extending our sensory organs out into the solar system. We don't have to take the meat. We can just extend the eyes, ears, nose, tongue and fingers without sending the whole meat. Sending the meat is expensive, and always, _<em >always</em>_ will end in death. Any extended stay anywhere we could plausibly reach is a recipe for certain cancer. Really, just think about any plausible "colonization" scenario. It means people living the rest of their lives in spaces the equivalent of commercial airliners and absorbing enormous amounts of solar radiation among company of a few dozen, at best, other individuals. Never again seeing a blue sky. Never again feeling wind. Never again smelling grass, or the sea, or cinnamon, or petting a dog. Never. Just steel cylinders, arbitrary experiments, tightly controlled schedules, and dying young from untreatable cancers. That is what life offworld means, in reality. There is no place we know of, anywhere, that offers a better deal.<br /><br />Terraforming is an endeavor so expensive and unlikely that I feel very confident in betting it will never, ever happen. And I love those Kim Stanley Robinson Mars books as well. I <em >so want</em> it to happen.<br /><br />But it won't.<br /><br />We can get basically all the benefit and none of the detriment of exploration by sending machines instead of us. Only rich thrillseekers will go into orbit for the next 100 years. maybe the Moon will become the 22nd Century's Everest, littered with colorfully weatherproofed corpses. But there is no _<em >future</em>_ there.<br /><br />I think the future is _<em >here</em>_.<br /><br /><br />#TravellingRenewingCommunitiesTeam<br /><br />@Ben Gwalchmai - I have no idea why you spoilered the end of your post, because it was teriffic! <br /><br />You used a phrase, "local social-democracy", that I like <em >a lot</em>. One thing I think that has been definitively illustrated by the recent Arab Spring is that self-determination, although still certainly the ideal to which all human society needs to aspire for justice to prevail, <em >needs</em> to arise organically out of the local culture. It cannot be <em >taught</em>. It absolutely cannot be <em >imposed</em>. it has to bubble up out of the desires of the people in a specific place at a specific time in their own specific way. It may not be completely recognizable to other democratic people elsewhere. It may have more or less of religion, science, cuture or bias threaded through it. That is <em >totally ok</em>. It just has to happen on it's own, in it's own context. Nobody can rush it. The best strategy is to live fulfilling lives in public, and don't meddle. Everyone has eyes in the 21st Century. The 20th Century might be described as a hundred years of making sure that everyone in the world has an opportunity to actually <em >see</em> each other. Now they certainly have that opportunity. All that remains is to live as best we can, love indiscriminately, and let people come to their inevitable conclusions.<br /><br />"Local social-democracy" will then happen, just as certainly as nudging a round stone over a ledge will cause it to roll downhill. It is a natural inclination. It is so, so close! ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=328057#Comment_328057</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=328057#Comment_328057</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Mar 2012 03:24:49 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Ben Gwalchmai</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ @Oddbill - glad you liked it. I think you're right about letting democracy happen, it can't be enforced.<br /><br />Maybe a #TravellingRenewingCommunitiesTeam would only go to places within its cultural-political realm then: say going to run down cities like Detroit and giving everyone who wants it the knowledge on how to grow your own food and, more specifically, what food types suit that area's soil.<br /><br />[ETA: It would also need a better name but I'm too hungover to think of one.] ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=328065#Comment_328065</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=328065#Comment_328065</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Mar 2012 05:43:29 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>curb</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ #Bigenergy <br /><br />I think that this is pretty much THE issue to get nailed because, if we can, it should help reduce the impact of just about every other problem we're currently facing. <br /><br />While I think that government and corporate involvement would be necessary to create the big chunks of transnational infrastructure needed to make a truly global grid, I love @Nelzbub's idea of individuals feeding energy into that grid from the bottom up.  It'd be great if we could  make use of potentially billions of tiny trickles of locally generated, sustainable energy. It wouldn't mitigate the need for big, dedicated energy generation systems, but it could help. I know that here in the UK, homeowners sometimes have the option of selling energy generated by solar panels, mini turbines etc back into the grid. I understand results have been mixed on that front, but maybe there's potential there ... ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=328078#Comment_328078</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=328078#Comment_328078</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Mar 2012 09:05:41 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Magnulus</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ #LittleBigEnergy<br /><br />I definitely think the combination of a global smart grid with local energy production feeding into the grid would be the way to go. You would, of course, still have big companies supplying the vast majority of energy, but this would mean that you could never 100% kill the world's energy. Just like you can't shut the internet off. Unless all the energy companies shut down, that is. :D ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=328102#Comment_328102</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=328102#Comment_328102</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Mar 2012 11:41:33 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Ben Gwalchmai</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ #LittleBigEnergy<br /><br />So, like the internet, make the energy production a series of smaller networks that all link up to one big network.<br /><br />I emailed this idea to the National Grid a while ago [yes, I'm a crackpot] and I hope they're putting it in place but who knows:<br /><br />step 1) reinforce our pylons<br />step 2) put solar panels suited to each country [in my case the UK] on those pylons<br />step 3) put enough tech at the bottom of said pylons [a battery, an oscillator, an amplifier, a computer regulator, and a transformer]<br />step 4) source that energy the local area<br />step 5) reap the benefits<br /><br />If I had the manpower and money, this is one of the things my #TravellingRenewableCommunitiesTeam would do and teach how to do. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=328157#Comment_328157</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=328157#Comment_328157</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Mar 2012 21:25:43 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>DavidLejeune</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ #FindAnotherRock<br /><br />The <strong >future</strong> <em >isn't</em> here, though. If there is one thing that we know for absolute fact about Earth, it is that it is a fucking death trap. It won't be in our lifetimes, and it probably won't be in our childrens' lifetimes, but at some point in the future the universe is going to decide to try to fucking kill everything on this rock <em >again</em>. All the recycling and green energy technology in the universe won't mean dick in the event of a supervolcano eruption or large asteroid collision.<br /><br />Robots are well and good, but when the thinking is 'we can send robots and they'll do it cheaper, better, safer, and happier than if we send people' then the development of technologies to do it cheaper, better, safer, and happier <em >with people</em> will continue to go by the wayside. Why should money be spent on the development of more efficient and faster thrusters, better re-usable orbital entry craft, and lighter and stronger radiation shielding? Robots don't need those things. And it's not like technologies originally developed for space travel have worked their way into our day to day lives. [/sarcasm] (And frankly the idea that the robots can do it better isn't totally true. People don't get stuck on rocks and just sit while their solar cells get covered in dust and their batteries run down, and if the Mars Climate Orbiter had been manned it wouldn't have burned up in the upper atmosphere because the people on board would've checked and triple checked the figures and said 'WTF, are you using English measurements?' before initiating orbital insertion).<br /><br />And the fact is, we have had the technology to put people on Mars for <em >decades</em>. What we haven't had is the economic and (<em >much</em> more importantly) political will to do so. If we'd started in the late seventies/early eighties, we'd have passably comfortable habitats by now. It probably wouldn't be a colony in any meaningful sense, but it would certainly be laying the groundwork for one. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331127#Comment_331127</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331127#Comment_331127</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 04:15:11 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Kosmopolit</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ "#ChildrenAreTheFuture<br />You know another way to fix this problem that should happen but probably won't? Rather than telling people not to have kids?<br />#FindAnotherRock<br />Why isn't space travel, colonizing Mars and all that, something that's going to happen? It needs to happen for our survival as a species if something goes terribly wrong on Earth. How can we fix this idea that space is a waste of money? I want this to happen. So do a lot of you, I think. So how can we as a group of people that believe in the future encourage another space race? " - fishelle<br /><br />Centuries of mass immigration to the Americas and Australia didn't stop Europe's population growth. In fact population grwoth in Europe only stopped around the same time that mass immigration stopped.<br /><br />It's going to be a very, very, long time (if ever) before space immigration is going to be anywhere near as cheap and easy as buying a steerage class ticket from Dublin to New York.<br /><br />Space travel can make us all much, much richer which will help greatly to reduce population growth and manage oru impact on the environment but we aren't going to solve overpopulation by a brute force mass immigration. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331128#Comment_331128</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331128#Comment_331128</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 04:19:38 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Kosmopolit</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ "The fact is, small, lightweight, overengineered robots do it better. They just do."<br /><br />That depends on what "it" is.<br /><br />The Appolo astronauts achieved far more in a total of about two weeks on the lunar surface than therMars rovers have achieved in almost a decade,<br /><br />On the other hand, if you're talking about fly-bys of the jovian moons, for example, robots are clearly superior - on economic grounds not technical ones. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331130#Comment_331130</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331130#Comment_331130</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 04:22:29 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Kosmopolit</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ "Maybe a #TravellingRenewingCommunitiesTeam would only go to places within its cultural-political realm then: say going to run down cities like Detroit and giving everyone who wants it the knowledge on how to grow your own food and, more specifically, what food types suit that area's soil."<br /><br />Ever stop to think that maybe the oens to teach those skills are thep eopel in the Favelas on Brazil and the slums of Nairobi who've been solving those same problems for generations?<br /><br />And why go there when you have telecommunications? ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331131#Comment_331131</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331131#Comment_331131</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 04:25:47 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Kosmopolit</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ #big energy<br /><br />If we are to develop space power satellites we need highly efficient ways to transmit power wirelessly over thousands of kilometres. <br /><br />If you have that, you can build a grid by bouncing power off satellites in low orbit. (Or you can build a virtual grid by switching powersats between different ground receivers. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331132#Comment_331132</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331132#Comment_331132</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 04:28:50 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Kosmopolit</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Guys, I'm seriously sleep-deprived here. I foudn this thread and commented on stuff of interest as I went through it. <br /><br />I hope none of my comments come off as overly snarky. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331146#Comment_331146</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331146#Comment_331146</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 10:42:01 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>government spy</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ To me, it feels like those 2am at the coffee shop conversations where we have these amazing exchanges but the next day can't remember shit about them; but here they're saved and readable later to help expand the thought and fine tune it until it becomes a great idea.  So keep it up; I don't have much to add at the moment, but I'll spectate and comment when appropriate. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331152#Comment_331152</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331152#Comment_331152</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 13:08:18 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>oddbill</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Regarding the notion of the earth being a "death trap", frankly that's one big nihilistic misconstruction.<br /><br />Yes eventually an asteroid will hit again, especially if we haven't managed a capability to detect and deflect ( things which absolutely do NOT require manned space flight), but seriously, <em >there is no place else we can go</em>.<br /><br />There are no reachable habitable places. Terraforming is unachievable science fiction for the foreseeable future. Leaving the atmosphere for any length of time is an expensive garauntee of death by cancer. Any time a human being is launched into space 99% of the mission is keep the human being alive, and then 1% is some science but mostly bullshit. There is no new world we can reach. There will be no Martian colony. People cannot live on Mars. Dreaming of that as any kind of a solution to anything is fantasy, full stop.<br /><br />Whenever you think of people off the earth, remember - cancer, cancer, cancer. Finite water. Finite air. No rescue. Plus more cancer.<br /><br />People say things like "Apollo astronauts achieved more in a few days than robots did for years" but I'd like to see some proof of that. Really? They did? They collected some rocks, planted flags, knocked a golf ball around, drove a little car and came back alive. I don't actually think that was better than things the Mars rovers have accomplished. It is much, much cheaper and safer to keep building more capable rovers than to send one human along with a couple of years worth of consumable earth environment all the way there.<br /><br />Manned space flight is a terrific stunt, but it is a dead end as a future because there is no place to go where we can live. <br /><br />#big energy - wireless transmission of mass power - now that is something to talk about! I read a treatment once of a plan to beam solar collected in orbit to microwave antenna farms in deserted areas on earth as a way to massively concentrate he collection of solar energy. I wonder about secondary effects of something like that though. Would th passage of a large continuous blast of microwaves through h atmosphere have noticeable climatological impact?  Radioactivity? How expensive would it be? ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331154#Comment_331154</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331154#Comment_331154</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 14:59:44 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Kosmopolit</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ "People say things like "Apollo astronauts achieved more in a few days than robots did for years" but I'd like to see some proof of that. Really? They did? They collected some rocks, planted flags, knocked a golf ball around, drove a little car and came back alive. I don't actually think that was better than things the Mars rovers have accomplished. It is much, much cheaper and safer to keep building more capable rovers than to send one human along with a couple of years worth of consumable earth environment all the way there."<br /><br />David Scott who was on the Apollo 15 mission wrote a book in which he discusses at length the gelogicial science he did.  It's well worth reading. Because he was on the spot he could modify the planned operation as he went along based on his observations. At one point, he spotted a particularly valuable specimen well off his planned route - so he decioded on the spot to change his route and in doing so exceeded the standard safety criteria - he cut way into his Oxygen reserve by extending the EVA time. <br /><br />There's no way a robot could make that real-time decision, assess the importance of the data potentially available and exceed mission parameters like that. The sample he brought back is one of the oldest known rocks from anywhere and is one of the msot valuable geological specimens of any sort anywhere.<br /><br />Meanwhie, the Mars rovers spend weeks or months navigating obstacles that a human could step right over - their speed is measured in metres per day. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331155#Comment_331155</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331155#Comment_331155</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 15:32:39 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>oddbill</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ And yet they get better every time, are directed by humans, and don't require billions of dollars worth of environmental support infrastructure be transported along with them. David Scott's very old rock is interesting no doubt. Was it worth the risk to the lives of all the Apollo astronauts and the immense expenditure to send them to the moon to get it when we did? I believe no. Is it possible for us to make such discoveries with robots? Absolutely yes.<br /><br />We have to give up a foolish and narrow aspiration to human space flight if we ever hope to break out of the 1950's stagnation in our dreams for the future. It is choking our imaginations. It is just not going to be a significant factor in any foreseeable future. Not. Going. To. Be.<br /><br />Every time someone brings it up here it's all, we must, we have to, etc. - sorry, I really am, because I loved this once too, but it can't work barring changes to the human condition so radical that we wouldn't be human any more. It is not going to be a factor. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331158#Comment_331158</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331158#Comment_331158</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 17:09:47 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Kosmopolit</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ So it's okay in imagining this new and better future to assume whatever advances in robotics are necessary for them to exceed human capabilities in this one particular area?<br /><br />That "very old rock" led directly to our current understanding of the formation of the moon and the history of the Earth. Information derived from our study of that "very old rock" is used daily by people in about half a dozen fields of science and technology ranging from astronomy to petroleum engineering. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331159#Comment_331159</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331159#Comment_331159</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 17:16:29 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>DavidLejeune</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ And you keep saying 'cancer' as if it's this instantaneous death sentence where as soon as you have it your life is <em >over</em>. It's not like we're constantly making new and better methods of treatment or anything.<br /><br />[edit]Here's a thing: <a href="http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10903&page=17" >NASA's Longitudinal Study of Astronaut Health</a>, which shows no statistically significant increase in cancer rates amongst 195 astronauts who had been in space between 1959 and 1991 in comparison to non-astronauts with similar health and fitness levels in the same period (adjusted relative risk of 4.26 percent for astronauts vs. 3.19 percent for non-astronauts). Accidental death is actually the only cause of death with a significant increase. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331162#Comment_331162</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331162#Comment_331162</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 18:34:06 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>oddbill</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ God this us the most frustrating conversation I've had here since the health care one long ago!<br /><br />If you insist on placing human travel in outer space in the middle of your expectations of the future, exactly what do you expect those people to be doing that will return to their sponsors (state, private, whatever) the cost of maintaining them in an environment utterly hostile to human life.<br /><br />Don't toy with colonization fantasies. What exactly is going to make the unbelievable expense worth while? ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331163#Comment_331163</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331163#Comment_331163</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 19:17:24 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>government spy</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Didn't a bunch of rich people just start a company for asteroid mining? I assume there must be a profit in that. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331164#Comment_331164</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331164#Comment_331164</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 19:18:31 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Kosmopolit</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ "Don't toy with colonization fantasies. What exactly is going to make the unbelievable expense worth while? "<br /><br />How is it "toying with colonization fantasies" to point out that their are human capabilities that are unlikely to be matched by robots any time soon?<br /><br />I'm not arguing for mass human colonization of space- in fact I pointed out the impracticality of such an idea as a solution to overpopulation.<br /><br />I am saying, for example, that it took human astronauts to repair the Hubble and that building a robotic mission capable of that, if it were possible at all, would have cost more and taken longer. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331167#Comment_331167</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331167#Comment_331167</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 20:11:49 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>oddbill</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ @kosmopolit, right, but LEO satellite repair is not what people who keep bringing up humans in space as a future to aspire to are talking about. Also, the Hubble repair trip was only possible because the existing space shuttle program could eat the cost of sending people, as the government was already dumping money out it's exhaust flues. That has stopped, and getting a manned satellite mission funded going forward will be more problematic. Ultimately using humans for satellite repair only makes sense when the satellite is more expensive than the cost of the mission to repair it, and it's doing something deemed to be important enough. Barring those things, if a cheaper robotic mission cannot repair it, it will be more cost effective to let the satellite fail and send up a new one later.<br /><br />I'll be very surprised if there is a replacement for the shuttle program in 10 years.<br /><br />EDITED TO ADD: I'm not arguing that robots match human capabilities. I'm arguing that they are orders of magnitude cheaper and safer, and that it is very difficult to justify the expense and risk of launching people when much much cheaper robots are good enough. You can see this actually playing out in the world. It is the way things actually are.<br /><br />@govspy - interestingly, that asteroid mining venture is robotic. Also, I expect it will fail to be profitable at it's stated goal, but may push some improvements in robotics that are spun off for other uses.<br /><br />I stand by my initial statement. We are not going back to the moon, except maybe as private citizens doing a stunt on par with what climbing Everest used to be. We are not going to Mars for a couple of generations at least. We will not have a colony there. Our futures are here, on Earth, and placing space travel in he middle of our dreaming of the future is one reason why our imaginative futures are so bankrupt. It's a distraction. There is a better future to be dreamed than these fantasies of humans on Mars. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331168#Comment_331168</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331168#Comment_331168</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 20:15:12 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Kosmopolit</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ "I'll be very surprised if there is a replacement for the shuttle program in 10 years."<br /><br />A replacement in what sense: a reuseable human-rated vessel capable of reaching LEO?<br /><br />I'll be surprised if there isn't one within 5 years. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331169#Comment_331169</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331169#Comment_331169</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 20:25:33 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>oddbill</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ @kosmopolit - I'd bet against it. But what I mean by a replacement of the shuttle program is a routine series of human missions into low earth orbit that each last several days. I don't think that is going to come back here (in the USA, either as a public or private venture) in under 10 years. I think the effort being maintained now by Russia and the ESA that keeps the ISS manned will wither over the next decade, not expand. <br /><br />I am a pessimist about human space flight because I no longer see a way for it to sustain itself. I do not believe governments will remain flush and stable enough to maintain it. I do not see a profit source to enable private industry to maintain it. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331171#Comment_331171</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331171#Comment_331171</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 21:00:45 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Kosmopolit</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Sorry but I disagree.<br /><br />Repairing comsats and Earth observation satellites, adjusting their orbits and de-orbiting space junk are all viable business opportunities- and also just happen to require the development of technologies that will enable missions beyond Earth orbit. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331172#Comment_331172</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331172#Comment_331172</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 21:16:16 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>oddbill</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ If manned repairs are viable business opportunities, then we'll see businesses doing it. Time will tell. I'm betting we won't see that happen. I'm betting improvements in automation and reduced costs of satellites themselves will eliminate the need for humans in orbit. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331173#Comment_331173</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331173#Comment_331173</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 21:19:02 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>oldhat</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ I kind of feel that this is steering away from the topic at hand. Can we maybe just assume, regardless of the reason, that going in to space is off the table and focus on other things the future might hold for our planet? Please?<br /><br />Evil Space Badgers. There we go. That's preventing people from going in to space. And we can't kill them. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331174#Comment_331174</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331174#Comment_331174</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 21:52:20 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Kosmopolit</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Okay, here's a thought.<br /><br />Pretty much all the discussion so far has been around the future of the developed world - primarily the US. When the other 80% or so of the human race is discussed its mainly in the context of how we can help them.<br /><br />What I think we're going to see though is the other 80% of the human race increasingly taking control of their own future - and thereby largely determining the future of the whole race.<br /><br />(People will go back to the moon regardless of what the US does because India and China are committed to doing so.)<br /><br />Since around 1980, about one billion people mostly in the developed world got access to personal computers and the internet.<br /><br />There's about another 4 billion people out there, mostly in the developing world,  with mobile phones who in the next few years will gain similar access. <br /><br />Old mobile phone designs don't die, they just get shipped to Africa. When Samsung, for example,  brings out a new design, the old chip set and the machines to make them don;t disappear. They just drop the price and sell the old designs in the developing world. <br /><br />Internet access and home computers effectively make us smarter (provided we sty off Youtube comment threads), the human race as a whole is going to get a lot smarter over the next decade or so. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331175#Comment_331175</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331175#Comment_331175</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 22:15:55 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>oddbill</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ <blockquote >What I think we're going to see though is the other 80% of the human race increasingly taking control of their own future - and thereby largely determining the future of the whole race</blockquote><br /><br />Yes x1000! I think it will shock the developed world how much the rest will not need us very soon.<br /><br />An interesting dynamic that arises out of the cell phone thing... Whole regions of the planet leapfrog the need for classes of infrastructure. They will not ever need the expensive and burdensome land-line or cable information infrastructure, they'll just be wireless from the start, therefore conceivably more able to pivot to what comes next. If you live in the USA you've experienced how weighed down we are by legacy information infrastructure. Established companies that dominate old channels don't want their business disrupted so they drag their feet and throttle and overcharge and under deliver. <br /><br />The other 80% doesn't have is problem. They have 99 problems, but AT&T ain't one.<br /><br />I'll bet in the future we see massive amounts of cross pollinated innovation that arises from less developed regions, and increasing attempts by the financial centers of the world to capture wealth out of innovation in those places, as opposed to mineral resources, as is currently the case.<br /><br />I'd be especially interested to see some unanticipated political innovation coming out of failed states that still are globally connected. I have a hard time imagining a better system than some form of democratic capitalism with socialist safety nets, but I take that as a sign of my deep immersion in a culture born of that arrangement. Someone living where there is no solid governance, but who can read about everyplace in the world, what will come out of that, I wonder? ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331189#Comment_331189</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331189#Comment_331189</guid>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 May 2012 03:07:28 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>curb</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ I might still.be drunk so apologies in advance if this sounds like bullshit. But what I imagine doesn't involve failed states becoming stable, functioning states in the same way we see them now. Instead, I reckon we'll see lots of small, local democracies that function with varying degrees of success, and which choose to be loosely federated with each other, within the borders of those former states. Pure speculation, of course. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331191#Comment_331191</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331191#Comment_331191</guid>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 May 2012 03:18:44 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Cat Vincent</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ #Resilience<br /><br />I suspect a lot of the future is, hopefully, going to look like the little Yorkshire towns of Hebden Bridge & Todmorden, who are combining John Robb-style resilience with a smart eye to repurposing existing infrastructure.<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/may/06/lifestyle-communities-hebden-bridge-todmorden" > Piece in The Guardian today on Tod's free home-grown fruit & veg initiative & other projects</a> gives a flavour.<br /><br />It's no coincidence that I'm moving to Hebden in (hopefully) ten weeks. Places like this have a much better chance of surviving and even thriving in a Grim Meathook scenario. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331196#Comment_331196</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331196#Comment_331196</guid>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 May 2012 03:39:50 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>curb</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ ^ Yes, yes, yes. Good luck with your move!  As the story admits, it wouldn't necessarily work the same way if applied to another town, but it would be brilliant to see communities elsewhere  applying their own versions of the Hebden Bridge model. That said, those communities need to be visibly and sustainably thriving before governments even think of withdrawing support for them. I'm tired of seeing our current national government using localism as an excuse for palming its  responsibilities onto local authorities that can ill afford to bear them. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331200#Comment_331200</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331200#Comment_331200</guid>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 May 2012 04:30:41 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Finagle</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Re: Space colonization, overcrowding and what we can learn from the 3rd world<br /><br />I suspect that the rest of the planet might actually consider loading a bunch of ship full of American and European folks and blasting them off into space a not altogether bad idea. Douglas Adams already thought of it. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331204#Comment_331204</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331204#Comment_331204</guid>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 May 2012 05:35:41 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Kosmopolit</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Thinking about 3D printing for a second: this may be another area where the developing world leapfrogs the developed world.<br /><br />We have well-developed retail chains that deliver all sorts of goods to us with minimal effort on our part. Just liek we had a land-lien phoen service that met most of our basic communications needs.<br /><br />So in the developed world, we'll see hobbyists buying  $500 -$2,000 home 3D printers to make bootleg Warhammer figures and personalized fleshlights.<br /><br />Meanwhile in the developing world, the same people who run interent cafes and phone kiosks out of shipping containers will be churning out flip-flops, combs and cheap eye-glasses and dentures. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331216#Comment_331216</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331216#Comment_331216</guid>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 May 2012 10:14:48 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>oddbill</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ I'm a bit of a skeptic about the replicators too, but largely because of the feedstock. It's plastic, right? As in, requires petroleum to make. So, as the world is on the brink of a push to move out of petroleum for fueling transportation, we're speculating the global adoption on a massive scale of another technology that will use petroleum to mass replicate discardable garbage. I kind of don't want that to happen.<br /><br />There are economies of scale  in the centralize and then distribute model of manufacturing at will probably always make it more cost effective than widely distributed manufacture, so the replicators will probably, I think, play only a fringe role for genuinely hard to reach places. <br /><br />I have a hard time seeing them really take off like say cars did, something they are often compared to as having been a hobbiest pursuit once and look at them now. But I'm less confident about that doubt, this could be a blind spot for me. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331231#Comment_331231</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=331231#Comment_331231</guid>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 May 2012 18:03:56 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Kosmopolit</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Yeah, there's been a serious lack of discussion about the sustainability of #D printing - and about the economics of it.  <br /><br />A couple of points: <br /><br />- Yeah, most 3D printers use some form of plastic although the high-end ones tend to use metal and some start from a solid block and carve out the final product.<br /><br />- IF you could make t5he plastic recyclable, it could make the whole process much more environmentally sustainable depending on the energy required.<br /><br />- There are big potential savings (both financial and material) in the supply chain. Rather than having to buy a pack of six tumblers, you can print off three.  If one shoe wears out first, print a replacement. Wal-Mart could replace thousands of different products with tankers full of liquid monomer - and never get stuck with excess stock.<br /><br />- Remote mines and scientific bases (in Antarctica for example) could save an enormous amount of money (and resources) by printing off spare parts rather than spending lots of resources transporting them.<br /><br />- Eventually <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claytronics" >smart matter</a> will be able to do many of the things we want to use  3D printing for and will be reprogrammable and reuseable. Imagine sub-cubic milimetre gizmos each with a microchip, an antenna to receive power; micromechanical actuators and a means (such as permanent magnets) to link together.  Stick them in a gadget the size of a microwave oven that beams power to them and instructs their microchips how to rearrange themselves. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332367#Comment_332367</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332367#Comment_332367</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2012 17:11:36 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Kosmopolit</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Oksy: this is a plug.<br /><br />If you want to help build that new better project go here: http://www.kiva.org/invitedby/ian4285 ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332402#Comment_332402</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332402#Comment_332402</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 02:59:45 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>sneak046</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ <blockquote >IF you could make the plastic recyclable, it could make the whole process much more environmentally sustainable depending on the energy required.</blockquote><br /><br />Chemically I can see no reason this cannot be acheived. There is already <a href="http://www.titech.com/" >technology in widespread use</a> that can sort  and pelletise plastics into separate polymers and colours - so theoretically it would not be impossible (though not necesarily economically viable) to collect used petro-plastics for reuse as feedstock for 3D printing. <br /><br />Of course this then leaves the question of whether or not the carbon-cost of moving small amounts of feedstock to a high number of miniature manufacturing sites is better than having large centralised hubs doing the manufacturing  Like @oddbill I am a little wary of the 'faddish' move to lionise the small/independent manufacturing atelier over the economies of scale provided by bigger production units - though there will inevitably be a number of them to cater to the high end small- run type of good that will command a premium over the mass-printed mainstream product. <br /><br />Previously I have given some thought to the prospect of future generations seeing robotic Van Neumann machines scurrying over landfill sites mining petro-plastics and other reuseable materials - strip mining the profligacy of our past for the scarcity of our future. <br /><br />I agree about the supply chain/logistics savings - possibly *the* selling point of the technology for lean managed/just in time production situations - the only problem then will <em >exactly how much monomer you will require to keep on stock....</em> ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332404#Comment_332404</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332404#Comment_332404</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 04:03:48 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Magnulus</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ I was positive I've seen interviews and such where they say that various 3D printers use biodegradable plastic as standard. Obviously, I can't remember specifically where I heard this or which 3D printers it applied to, but I'm SURE I heard that. Some of them even take returns on discarded items you've printed and recycle them into new feedstock.<br /><br />Also, there's a TED Talk about cost-effectively recycling plastic into base plastic pellets:<br /><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RD07GkmM2fc" >TED Talk</a> ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332407#Comment_332407</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332407#Comment_332407</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 04:51:12 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>sneak046</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ @Mag - Thanks, Closed Loop recycling/manufcturing is exactly what I was talking about :-) <br /><br />FWIW, I actually work in the waste recycling industry (and the company I work for has the highest recycling rate of any in the UK, believe it or not..) so I can assure you a bunch of stuff he was talking about already happens, but as a whole the industry is not as good at PR as doing a TED talk is....as an example, one plastics recycler I deal with has a contract to supply a certain well known sugary-flavoured soft drink manufacturer with PET flake from recycled plastic bottles to make new plastic bottles.<br /><br />In the EU we have a Landfill Tax Escalator, which means that each year the cost of landfill goes up £8/tonne - which is a driver for companies to reduce the amount of waste going to landfill, and makes the alternatives more economically viable in comparison - if someone will take your waste away for less than the prevailing landfill rate then you've effectively saved money. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332410#Comment_332410</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332410#Comment_332410</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 07:35:04 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Magnulus</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Hahah, I must have glossed over your post, as it does cover a lot of the same ground I did in mine. Sorry about that. :)<br /><br />It's weird how in some areas it seems having something made from recycled plastic is a boon while in others, they try to avoid talking about it. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332444#Comment_332444</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332444#Comment_332444</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 01:08:32 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Kosmopolit</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ A shift of topic: <br /><br />One thing we need is a new business model for intellectual property - one that puts money into the pockets of the creators and owners and yet allows free or near-free access to consumers.<br /><br />Free-to-air television and radio has provided this over most of the globe for decades.<br /><br />So why can't internet distribution of audio, vidoe and the written word?<br /><br />Some thoughts:<br /><br />1. The Kickstarter model. I would gladly pay $50 or $100 for a new Brian Hughart Master Li novel. Fans of a creator could simply take up a subscription to finance the creation of a work which would then be distributed under the creative commons model.<br /><br />2. The ad-supported model: finance material solely based on product placement. You could embed a program on a site and then electronically modify background billboards etc and get payment on a per-view program - or simply run a textcrawler of ads during the program.<br /><br />3. Legalize the pirates: simply strike deals with Pirate Bay et al to share their revenue with creators.<br /><br />4. The public lending right model. Charge a small tax for data transmission, then pay a proportion of it to creators based on how frequently theri work is transmitted. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332450#Comment_332450</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332450#Comment_332450</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 03:05:41 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Ben Klumaster</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Of those I have problems with (2) and (3). (2) because really, I'd rather just pay than put up with that crap. (3) because while the pirates may be making a profit, it's not going to look like much once you share it out among the creators. If they were, they'd essentially have to be doing (2). ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332451#Comment_332451</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332451#Comment_332451</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 03:19:14 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Kosmopolit</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Ben, would it really bother you if a car drove past a Ford billboard on one viewing of a TV program and a Chrysler billboard the next time? ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332454#Comment_332454</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332454#Comment_332454</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 04:40:36 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Flabyo</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Point 2 already happens with videogames. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332460#Comment_332460</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332460#Comment_332460</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 07:34:51 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>sneak046</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Tangential to point two, the TV advertising break certainly doesn't have much life left - certainly we can expect increasing targetting of adverts based upon our own product selections/choices - take this example set in 2020 from this Imperica article <a href="http://www.imperica.com/viewsreviews/the-creation-of-demand" >"The Creation Of Demand"</a><br /><br /><blockquote >The 30-second spot has become largely irrelevant; ‘Addressable TV’, which let advertisers target specific households with TV ads (Johnston, 2011 (6) ), was nothing more than Henry Ford’s ‘faster horse’, the solution advertisers thought they wanted. As the skipping and blipping of ads became increasingly commonplace it was proven in 2018 that a campaign of 800 TVRs wasn’t actually seen by anybody…<br /><br />Instead, the commercial support of advertisers is woven into the very fabric of the shows themselves. Whilst in one programme, the heroine wears Adidas, drinks Pepsi and cracks the Pentagon’s network with her Apple iWatch. In the other programme she’s clad in Nike, sated with Coca-Cola and performs her death-defying feats of silicon daredevilry with the ‘Intel Inside’ chip in her wrist.<br /><br />The version of the show you see is tweaked, scene-by-scene, just for you. It pulls together the data on who you are, who you know, where you’ve been, what you’ve bought and what you’ve yet to buy, and creates the show for you in real time.<br /><br />This happens across every show, every surface, every channel and every interface. Ads still exist of course, but they’re put together from a million possible options, each based on a different part of your data.</blockquote><br /><br />Also I one aspect of our probable future that I don't think has been disussed on this thread (as far as i can remember) is the impact of algorithm based entities in shaping the world (see <a href="http://www.ted.com/talks/kevin_slavin_how_algorithms_shape_our_world.html" >Slavin TED 2011</a>). We are consistantly seeing greater influence of the agency of algo-entities across the spectrum, and they do things that are impossible to predict or sometimes even understand  - you only need to look at the recent weird behaviour of the stock price during the Facebook IPO to see this in action (<a href="http://www.buzzfeed.com/jwherrman/how-facebooks-ipo-got-hijacked-by-computers" >Buzzfeed, How Facebook's IPO Got Hijacked by Computers</a>) <br /><br />(((there's a commonality of ground here with <a href="http://booktwo.org/notebook/waving-at-machines/" >James Bridle's New Aesthetic</a>, but I am not keen on provoking a discussion about the merits of that particular term/movement here as it'd probably need a separate thread))) ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332481#Comment_332481</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332481#Comment_332481</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 12:36:27 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Kosmopolit</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Tangential to my last topic, what earthyl reason is there for any book to be "out of print" these days? ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332545#Comment_332545</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332545#Comment_332545</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 07:19:48 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Ben Klumaster</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ My problem with free-with-ads is that once you're reliant on the ads as your primary source of income, you're going to have an awful lot more. One thing that's currently annoying me in games is this attitude where deciding where and how to put in micropayments and adverts is a primary design concern right from the outset. I'm reminded of that ridiculous chunk of I, Robot where Will Smith is waiting for a delivery of some antique modern day trainers. Clearly in this future we're discussing people are going to be buying stuff still, so I'd be happier buying the film without the text-crawler and compromised artistic vision. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332546#Comment_332546</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332546#Comment_332546</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 07:55:40 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Flabyo</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ @ben - with the games you're talking about, those are the only ways to get them funded at the moment. The whole games industry is in a right old state, and only guarenteed 3 million sellers get the up front publisher cash now. Everything else has to monetise as best as it can just to get to exist in the first place... ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332547#Comment_332547</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332547#Comment_332547</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 08:32:08 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Ben Klumaster</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ I'm aware of the problem, but I don't think the current solution for that problem is a good template for how to build the future for all media. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332739#Comment_332739</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332739#Comment_332739</guid>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 May 2012 23:07:38 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>oddbill</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ I think the future of advertising is a really great angle to be taking, as it is essentially the future of how involuntary psychology will be leveraged to influence the mass behavior of people in really any context. The way it is normally understood is in an economic context - how do you pull on the levers of psychological response to nudge people into a specific economic activity, but it is used for non-economic purposes as well, and it is pervasive. One form of advertising, for example, is religious doctrine, and it is used to bend mass human behavior in support of certain social behaviors, or against others. It has been promulgated on multiple levels, from spectacle to intellectual, and contains economic dimensions as well.<br /><br />Now that we have a mass culture that is more literate and more conscious of the levers advertising works on, what ways can those be used to, say, increase justice? Improve health? What are the goals to which the practice of advertising should aspire? How can it be policed, in the sense that, as it operates by pulling triggers in the psyches of individuals, what can be done to hedge unscrupulous or non-consensual manipulation?<br /><br />I think that's a really valuable channel to think down.<br /><br />The Old Gaffer posted a bit of <a href="http://www.warrenellis.com/?p=14117" >weirdly sympathetic schadenfreude</a> about Charlie Stross' <a href="http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2012/05/meta-comments.html" >disappointment in the narrow imaginations of his regular commenters</a>. It states in better words exactly what I was trying to do in starting this thread. The topics he laments every discussion degenerating into are:<br /><br /><blockquote >* Space colonization<br /><br />* Automotive technology<br /><br />* Things that go fast and explode (rockets, military aircraft)<br /><br />* Alternative energy (from solar through wind/wave to nuclear)<br /><br />* Libertarianism (and everything is worse with libertarians)</blockquote><br /><br />Someone in the comment thread basically argues, well, these are thing people interested in the future are <em >interested</em> in. To which he beautifully replies:<br /><br /><blockquote ><strong >24:</strong><br /><blockquote ><em >These are all areas of interest to someone interested in the future.</em></blockquote><br /><br />Why?<br /><br />Why are they intrinsically more interesting than, say, the politics of gender/ethnic emancipation? Or the design of better kitchen appliances? Items which directly affect a near- or outright majority of the population every day?<br /><br />Your focus on these fetish items -- indeed, the focus exhibited by many commenters here -- seems to me to betray a certain narrowness and lack of depth to their interest in the future.</blockquote><br /><br />YES! <em >Fetish items</em>. This is the thing I was trying to get at. The futuristic tropes I was trying to rule out of discussion in the first post, that so many have fought to keep in play, are subcultural fetish items with very little connection to the fates of the majority of the species.<br /><br />But things like advertising touch almost all of us every day! ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332749#Comment_332749</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332749#Comment_332749</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 May 2012 01:20:18 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>sneak046</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ S'funny, I was literally just reading the gaffer's post and thought of this disussion so I'm glad to find you are in agreement...<br /><br />I am totally on your wavelength here. Part of me thinks the tropes of the C20th 'Future' are comfortable (..ing?) to people and so ingrained that it's hard to shake off the future vision that they create, but as you say for the huge majority these subjects are fetish items (I totally think we should adopt this term).  It's sort of like the old way of looking at history - focussing on wars and kings and empire, and forgetting to think about how the ordinary person's life was led during differing periods of technological advancement.<br /><br />In the field of adverstising one recent development that concerns me is the erecting of 'Brand Exclusion Zones' around the Olympic sites in London - from <a href="http://newsfeed.kosmograd.com/kosmograd/2012/05/olympics-brand-exclusion-zone.html" >Kosmograd</a>:<br /><br /><blockquote >In urban design, exclusion zones are becoming commonplace in relation to sponsorship of sporting events. The Brand Exclusion Zone is the newest form of urban demarcation, and can be used not only to affect signage and advertising, but also restrict personal freedom of choice. Within this context, the London 2012 Olympics represents one of the most radical restructuring of the rights of the city in London. The 'canvas' of London will belong exclusively to the Olympic marquee brands.</blockquote><br />and<br /><blockquote >The most carefully policed Brand Exclusion Zone will be around the Olympic Park, and extend up to 1km beyond its perimeter, for up to 35 days. Within this area, officially called an Advertising and Street Trade Restrictions venue restriction zone, no advertising for brands designated as competing with those of the official Olympic sponsors will be allowed. (Originally, as detailed here, only official sponsors were allowed to advertise, but leftover sites are now available). This will be supported by preventing spectators from wearing clothing prominently displaying competing brands, or from entering the exclusion zone with unofficial snack and beverage choices. Within the Zone, the world's biggest McDonald's will be the only branded food outlet, and Visa will be the only payment card accepted.</blockquote><br /><br />This kind of mediation of the urban canvas will be more commonplace I believe, especially as we see a further extension of the private/corporate ownership of 'public' spaces - which brings a loss of the democracy of the urban space. <br /><br />On a technological level, Augmented Reality billboards are <a href="http://www.psfk.com/2012/02/tic-tac-augmented-reality-billboard.html" >already</a> <a href="http://mashable.com/2010/04/29/ar-billboard-street-fight/" >here</a>, and as too are billboards that <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/02/the-bus-stop-that-knows-youre-a-lady/253365/" >display gender specific adverts dependant on the sex of the viewer</a> (of course the machine vision that decides which gender the viewer is not 100% foolproof..)<br /><br />Apart from the evolutionary arms-race that is the advertiser/consumer relationship, another part of aspect of futurism that may be worth considering here is <a href="http://nearfuturelaboratory.com/2012/03/04/corner-convenience-near-future-design-fiction/" >Near Future Laboratory's 'Corner Convenience'</a> idea - that things that were once technological marvels are now commonplace enough to sit on the counter of your local convenience store for 99¢ (or 99p) - their design fiction videos on this subject are fertile ground for imagining the type of product we'll see in the convenience store of the future (which lets face it, is the sort of future that most of us will be experiencing). ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332819#Comment_332819</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332819#Comment_332819</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 May 2012 15:41:37 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Kosmopolit</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ One reason discussion tends to keep coming back to the fetish objects is that they're the LCD of the future.<br /><br />I may be interested in the democratization of industrial design.<br /><br />You may be interested in the implications of avatars and agents on concepts of the self. <br /><br />But we can both go "oooh" when something 'splodes good.<br /><br />Space Travel is the "Cops" or "Funniest Home Videos" of amateur internet futurism.<br /><br />On a different note: during the premiere of the Canadian sf show Conintuum the Showcase network actually ran an ad for a mobile phone carrier  during the program -stills only, no audio, and it popped up in the lower left hand corner of the screen where they normally run stuff like promos for other shows. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332821#Comment_332821</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332821#Comment_332821</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 May 2012 15:43:55 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Kosmopolit</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ "Apart from the evolutionary arms-race that is the advertiser/consumer relationship,..."<br /><br /><br />Heres' a thought: what happens when adbusters gets hold of Google Goggles technology and offers an "ads-free" app that recognises and censors corporate logoes? ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332834#Comment_332834</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332834#Comment_332834</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 May 2012 16:07:20 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>oddbill</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ In keeping with my apparent role as resident curmudgeon - I can't think of two things less likely to exert even the slightest influence over the future than adbusters or Google Goggles. Might as well wonder what Highlights magazine would do with a pair of 3DTV glasses.<br /><br />People online don't even universally use browser adblock plugins. People mostly don't care, and I don't see any reason to think that they suddenly will. Google Goggles will not be widely adopted because people have exhibited an uniform preference for not wearing stuff on their face that isn't medically necessary. I think almost nobody looks at the notion of icons in their walking field of vision as a desirable thing. I'd argue that if someone says they do, they will quickly discover they don't once they try it. And adbusters will never instigate anything bigger than the dying Occupy movement.<br /><br />Short answer: If they did that, nobody would care or use it. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332870#Comment_332870</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332870#Comment_332870</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 02:03:03 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>sneak046</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ @Kosmopolit - agreed, everyone loves a good WHEEE! every now and then. <br /><br />In the google glasses thread I jokingly inquired as to whether it would be feasible to generate AR filters for *<strong >anything</strong>* the user would find objectionable - for instance images of a sexual nature (Reality 2.0, now Safer For The Children) or poor people (For the 1%er who finds poverty distasteful)...<br /><br />Referencing Gibson's 'the street finds its own use for things' though, so I wouldn't want to dismiss the notion of FOS-Spex completely. Tim Maughan's '<a href="http://timmaughanbooks.com/paintwork/" >Paintwork</a>' collection of stories explores some ways in which AR may develop (and is the source of my use of the word Spex for google glasses..).<br /><br />I wonder how quickly legislators would catch on that driving while using spex would be a bad idea.*<br /><br />There may though be certain groups of people that have good use-cases for Spex - imagine a warehouse manager getting real time stock information, or law enforcement/military personnel having a tactical overlay displayed in their visual field, but for the mainstream I agree that pervasive visual-field User Interaction is unlikely to win AR Spex any friends. If combined with a gestural interface which would bring up/dismiss the AR layer at will this be a better option, I reckon 'kinect' style gestural interfaces are probably going to be more ubiquitous than wearable computing for mainstream users - having your home recognise input commands would be ace: <em >waves hand at espresso machine, cup of coffee waiting by the time you've walked over to it.</em><br /><br /><br /><br />[*edited to add: I suppose we'll all be driven along in our google earth navigated, self-driven cars though by then... ] ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332878#Comment_332878</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332878#Comment_332878</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 04:52:39 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>sneak046</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ once again Charles Stross <a href="http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2012/05/deconstructing-our-future.html" >points us in the right direction</a> - Our accelerating change/future-shock meme <a href="http://amormundi.blogspot.it/2012/05/unbearable-stasis-of-accelerating.html" >is a by-producct of deviant globalisation</a> ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332890#Comment_332890</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332890#Comment_332890</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 09:40:53 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>REL</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Google Glasses are all well and fine, but they seem to be more of this "life-blogging" which Big Poppa shared, like, a year ago? These devices plug us in to a shared consciousness on the net but if we're not doing anything interesting with these things then what is the purpose <br /><br />A lot of interesting news in today's (paper) edition of the San Jose Mercury News, including speculation about Facebook's stock (it sucks), Tim Cook will be Tim Cook and not Steve Jobs, an Appalachian town in Pennsylvania has little hope as coal loses value to natural gas, but most importantly this piece borrow from the New York Times: <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/30/us/new-digital-divide-seen-in-wasting-time-online.html" >Wasting Time Is New Divide in Digital Era</a><br /><br />The article talks about how poor people are using digital devices and the internet as a distraction rather than a  tool. (Which sort of seems obvious when I consider the platforms from which these devices have emerged, as corporate fueled devices in which people are encouraged to spend the minute amount of available capital they have on micro-payments and mini-transactions) So, when we consider the future we should consider the way traditional values are changing alongside the emergence of new technologies, if the majority of the population is happy eating the garbage shoveled them by mass media how can we expect to live in a future where these technologies prioritize <em >our</em> value of life? It's the whole world that's launching into the new frontier not just us early tech adopters and futurists. It's a global movement which means we need to consider everyone who shares the world with us.<br /><br />Now for a bit of good news, eh? There are some Bay Area schools which have adopted a computer testing system that handles all the monotonous test-taking, leaving the job of teaching new information in the hands of the teachers. (I poked around the net for a few minutes without finding a link, sorry but I've got things to do. I'll wait for the beatings over here in the corner. Please mind my head, thank you, it's lumpy enough) Perhaps in order to build a better future, until such a time that intelligence-enhancing implants are made readily available, we need still consider just how these emergent technologies will enhance our standard of living as opposed to providing new distractions and over-informing our peers.<br /><br />tl;dr Technology for people living below the poverty line sometimes results in a loss of of quality of life. [edit: What happens when technology panders to the broadest consumer base?] ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332893#Comment_332893</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332893#Comment_332893</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 10:36:56 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>allana</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Uhhh, "quality of life" is not objective. This idea that low-income people with technology must necessarily be doing "stupid" things is pretty insulting. Twenty years ago poor people would be spending their limited disposable income on clothing/cars/other things to make themselves appear less poor. Maybe what the article really meant to say was: Bad parents are everywhere, and their method of parenting -- buying their kids something shiny to shut them up -- will never really change.<br />Isn't it better that we have smartphones which occasionally result in function, rather than something purely decorative? Isn't it better that we're spending less money going out to movies and more time figuring out how to pirate them? Isn't it better that a few people occasionally stumble upon Instructables and try out some DIY stuff once in their lives? Also, video games are good for your brain. <br /><br />Just an idea: why don't we teach kids how to use technology in interesting ways (i.e. how to teach themselves the shit they're interested in) rather than limit their access / bore them to tears / scare them off with threats? I spent a LOT of time on the internet as a kid, and as a result I got bored of chatrooms and instant messaging pretty early, and am now cooler for it. Can't we structure this shit through the novelty period so we can get down to business?<br /><br />(Other idea: why don't we make media screens hurt our eyes more? So that's it's physically impossible to spend more than four hours a day with a computer, before you have to get outside and play in the dirt?) ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332915#Comment_332915</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332915#Comment_332915</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 16:14:01 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Kosmopolit</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ I knwo this marks me out as a Robot cultist/fanboy/wanker because only mindless conformists believe in Space travel (Papa Warren as said it so it must be true.) but it seems to me that any realistic look at the immediate future actually has to factor in a much larger human presence in sapce.<br /><br />Just ask <a href="http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CGAQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.stratolaunch.com%2Fnews.html&ei=GafGT-nMKqayiQeJo6CVCg&usg=AFQjCNHyd0LynLguAH2x9Rsz7DVbshXvTw&sig2=fp6xKQroiDD4PtB3GkFY6g" >Paul Allan</a>,<a href="http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/05/spacex-release-splashdown/" > Elon Musk</a> or <a href="http://news.discovery.com/space/spaceshiptwo-cleared-120530.html" >Richard Branson. </a><br /><br />You can argeu about how significant it is; you can argue about hether or not its desirable but you can't deny it's happening and will continue to happen. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332919#Comment_332919</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332919#Comment_332919</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 17:20:35 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>oddbill</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Hm. The Papa Warren crack seems misplaced. I rather get the impression that he has favored and continues to favor manned space flight. Maybe you are responding to some of us referring to his pointing to a Charlie Stross post that was about Charlie's frustrations with commenters? The fact that Charlie Stross being bored with his commenters endlessly circling arguments about space colonization, among other things, gave Warren some thoughts about the value of blog comments says nothing about his opinions about human space flight. That I found Charlie's characterization of the topics that bored him dovetailed well with the intention behind starting this thread doesn't really suggest there is any kind of ideological conformity happening. Particularly as I don't think Warren would agree with me and I made all of my arguments long before Charlie Stross wrote that bit.<br /><br />SpaceShip Two is a suborbital tourist stunt lob. It will last as long as people will pay thousands to pop briefly out of the atmosphere. It is no more inevitable a first step to anything that the Concorde was to mass supersonic flight. <br /><br />Space X's cargo capsule is neat, and at least has some connection to actual space infrastructure. It was an unmanned cargo lob.<br /><br />Stratolaunch is also a payload delivery system, not a manned effort.<br /><br />You'll argue that these two payload delivery systems could at some point carry people. True but so can the Russian program right now. The national manned space flight programs are dying out because there is very little for people to do in orbit, and nothing that returns the investment of sending them. Innovative payload delivery systems from private industry will make money delivering satellites and robotics into space, not people. <br /><br />I do deny that human space flight will continue at even it's current negligible scale. Again, time may prove me wrong and I wouldn't be sad if it did, but really I don't see any real evidence of that changing.<br /><br />Is it really so hard to try imagining other things? I don't get the utter inability to just set this topic aside. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332920#Comment_332920</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332920#Comment_332920</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 18:12:05 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Kosmopolit</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ "I don't get the utter inability to just set this topic aside. '<br /><br />I'm obviously guilty of badthink and I'll stop now. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332922#Comment_332922</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332922#Comment_332922</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 18:41:15 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>oddbill</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Man, I love being passive-argessively accused of being some sort of Orwellian thought cop for trying to keep a conversation that was explicitly started to talk about non-space related futurism from being constantly derailed into space. I just love it.<br /><br />My web rage is rising now, so I'll back away. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332925#Comment_332925</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332925#Comment_332925</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 19:49:57 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Kosmopolit</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Yes and I'll shut the fuck up so that my deviationism doesn't interfere with a lively, free and open debate on the Approved Topic.<br /><br />Because if you look back at this thread all I did was talk obsessively about space. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332943#Comment_332943</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332943#Comment_332943</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 23:41:05 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>REL</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ I believe this is relevant to our interests: <br /><br /><a href="http://youtu.be/zT9F9feTpMw" >The Pod Techno Dawn</a><br /><br />(found on <a href="http://shootemupride.tumblr.com/post/23722392580/the-pod-techno-dawn-if-you-dont-get" >http://shootemupride.tumblr.com/post/23722392580/the-pod-techno-dawn-if-you-dont-get</a>) ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332944#Comment_332944</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332944#Comment_332944</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 23:41:58 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Magnulus</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ By Degrasse-Tyson's elbow, why is this space stuff still up for discussion? Plenty of threads have a set structure. The structure of this thread is this: "Imagine, if you will, a future where manned space flight is too expensive and impractical and politically hard to justify. What, then, can we do to make the world a better place?"<br /><br />This is forum full of intelligent, free-thinking, creative individuals. The thread's brief should be taken as an exciting creative and intellectual challenge, not an Orwellian plot to stop you thinking about lovely space ships. We have so many opportunities to think about the colonisation of mars, the space elevator, extra-solar space travel, etc etc etc. <br /><br />I would love for manned space flight to happen. I would love for us to colonise Mars. I have a HUGE (and I mean Pavonis Mons huge) boner for Mars, and I do believe that as impractical and expensive and dangerous as it is, manned spaceflight to some place new could help inspire several generations of kids and adult and fuel a renewed interest in the sciences.<br /><br />But that's not what this thread was set up to be about. It's about this place. Earth. And what we can do about it before it goes to shit. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332946#Comment_332946</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332946#Comment_332946</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2012 00:10:15 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>DavidLejeune</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ The 'renewed interest in the sciences' is the big thing, though.<br /><br />You go to the American people and you tell them you want to spend several hundred million dollars of tax payer money to develop a man portable filtration system that is capable of processing potable water out of anything from sea water to human faeces, with a biodegradable filter assemblage that's capable of processing a hundred odd gallons of water before the filter needs to be replaced, for the purposes of disaster relief in third world countries or for use in African villages without clean water supplies, the majority will vote against it because that ain't their problem. You tell them this is for putting a human being on Mars, you're going to get a <em >lot</em> more interest.<br /><br />When you break down what the technologies that you'd need to put together even a 50-75% self-sustaining manned round trip, the vast majority of them have immediate real world applications that make the world a better place. But without a tangible, sexy end goal like 'FIRST MAN ON MARS,' the political will isn't there, because the majority of people are stupid and think that we don't need shit like more efficient filtration systems, or lighter weight radiation shielding, or engineered crops that are more suited to hydroponic growth, or smaller, safer, more efficient nuclear reactors, for life here on Earth. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332976#Comment_332976</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=332976#Comment_332976</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2012 10:16:12 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Fishelle</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ <blockquote >You tell them this is for putting a human being on Mars, you're going to get a lot more interest.</blockquote><br /><br />See, I don't think that necessarily true. Most of the average people I know, living in Utah and being around folks that I disagree with politically, laugh at the thought of spending all that money to go to mars or the like.<br /><br />The other thing is, the way the American government is set up, you shouldn't <em >have</em> to convince the American people. The idea with the way things were set up, is that you just have to convince their representatives, really. The problem becomes that people who weren't put into office still find power because of money. And the whole "corporations are now people" nonsense doesn't help with that.<br /><br />And since we mentioned filters, I'd like to bring up this <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2008/04/04/big-problem-neat-solution.html" >really old article</a>. I think, with a lot of the stuff that could make the world a better place, it already exists, at least partially. And we have the technology to make it everything it needs to be. The problem is getting it out into the world, when thousands of people or corporations don't want it to because it affects their bottom line. As much as I'd like electricity and clean water for the places that don't have it, I can't see the current governments in power just giving that stuff away when it doesn't help them. I think if you asked the American people if they wanted to help out those starving kids in Africa, they'd be all over that. But they don't really have a say. It's the people who have a budget to keep or their jobs are on the line that do.<br /><br /><br />I've certainly been guilty of derailing this thread to talk about space, and I apologize. I hope we can stick with the topic at hand, because I'm really interested in what ideas you guys have to offer. I'll probably be pretty quiet, because I don't really feel like I know enough about anything to contribute anything worthwhile, but please keep talking. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333013#Comment_333013</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333013#Comment_333013</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2012 19:43:21 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>DavidLejeune</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ <blockquote >The idea with the way things were set up, is that you just have to convince their representatives, really.</blockquote>Well, no. You're supposed to convince the people and they're supposed to tell their representatives. That's why they're <em >representatives</em>.<br /><br /><a href="http://io9.com/5914618/could-a-private-corporation-like-spacex-land-the-first-humans-on-mars" >Io9 had a good article about going to Mars today,</a> and the last paragraph sums up my whole point (bolds mine): <blockquote >If we actually manage to get people to Mars and they survive the trip, that means we'll have solved "a heck of a lot of problems" that could make the world a better place in general, says Zurbuchen. <strong >We'll have figured out the answers to a lot of major questions, and probably increased the living standards of people on Earth in the process</strong>.</blockquote> And of course, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHGK96-WixU" >it's what's next</a>. And with that I'm done. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333022#Comment_333022</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333022#Comment_333022</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2012 23:16:02 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>allana</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ <em >KNOCK IT OFF YOU GUYS</em><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />#RedrawingTheLines<br /><br />I'm gonna take off from Argos's suggestion of border-free-ness/mobility/etc. While the idea of a border-free world isn't feasible (because I like my healthcare, dammit, and my employment insurance, and my library card, and stuff) I do really enjoy the idea of people self-organizing around common ideals and motivations. Like Cat Vincent's link a while back, about less-than-privileged English towns developing guerilla gardens and working out self-sustaining community activities. Or Detroit turning into a mecca for off-gridding urban farmers. I think that the '60s commune idea should be institutionalized, to an extent, and that actual geography should be designated as space for certain specific ideas. Why not? We have the information systems in place to research places and systems, and the affordable worldwide transit to get us there. Why can't there be a tract of land in Alaska for hermits like me (who are okay with transactions and favours, but not small-talk and melodrama), or a lush and fertile Vegans-Only county in California, or a LAN-Party-All-The-Time borough of New York, or even something serious like a Downs Syndrome And Support Workers Paradise? Physical self-segregation is something we ALWAYS do, most obviously in urban neighbourhoods, and there's no reason why we couldn't make it official (to some extent; not as the dominant political bodies, I'm sure, because someone will play the "people are stupid and racists are around and what about the Marauder-states and Baby-Eater-states and oh hey can we have nomads or what the fuck" cards and yeah, letting people isolate themselves with like-minded people can be dangerous sometimes, duh) and allow those groups to self-organize, develop biased mandates and bureaucracies, and then screen their immigrants according to ideas/aptitude/useful skills. Did I say "why not?" already? ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333024#Comment_333024</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333024#Comment_333024</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2012 23:32:36 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>allana</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ #seaQuestForSrs<br /><br />I mentioned this topic to my boyfriend this morning, and his first thought was "seaQuest." Does anybody have any thoughts as to deep-sea exploration, habitation, parties in the Marianas, a desperate hunt for natural resources, etc? Does the idea of our expansion into the other two-thirds of the planet help out with anyone's concerns about critical mass? What sort of ecological changes should we be concerned about? How cool is it that we're building artificial reefs out of old subway cars now? Most importantly, does anyone have any concerns about me trying to web my toes by cutting and transplanting skin from other parts of my body? Good, didn't think so.<br /><br /><br />(Also, Jonathan Brandis: cute, or the cutest?) ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333026#Comment_333026</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333026#Comment_333026</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2012 23:43:40 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Magnulus</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Oh, here's something as well!<br /><br />#PayTheFarmers<br /><br />Pay the fucking farmers! In Norway, there's been a big hullaballoo lately about the basically terrible earning situation of farmers. They're supposed to grow and rear the food that we put inside our eat-holes and yet they don't make enough money to live like a most people without having a second job. Basically, the only people who are farmers in Norway right now are people who do it because they love farming. I mean, yay, it's great that our farmers love farming, but at LEAST make it profitable! Otherwise, all Norwegian-produced food is grown basically by hobbyists!<br /><br />Also, #TakeCareOfTeachers! <br />The quickest, easiest, most sure-fire way to make sure our children grow up with an active relationship to learning is to make sure you can entice GOOD teachers to join the profession. You can't just pay them loads of money, of course, because that would attract people who go just for money, but you can give them enough money that good people wouldn't be put off by low pay. <br /><br />Another thing that would make everyone's lives less stressful is to reduce class sizes. Means you need more teachers, so it costs money, but if politicians could think ahead further than their next election, this should be a no-brainer. Smaller classes means more classes, which means you can tailor the teaching to different types of students. When not all classes are the same, different teachers with different strengths get to focus on teaching in a way that suits them, so you get back more than what you pay for as you have more efficient, less stressed-out teachers who can connect with their students more easily. (I think it should be obvious why it would make sense to have extroverted teachers teaching extroverted children. That might not be the category system we're looking for, I'm just making one example.) ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333035#Comment_333035</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333035#Comment_333035</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 02:47:57 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>sneak046</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ @Allana <br /><br />With your webbed feets, you would be welcomed as 'one of us' in the area of the UK I come from (The Fens, where incest was only defeated by the practical implementation of the bicycle).<br /><br />#RedrawingTheLines - When discussing self-organising communties, one thing to remember is that the '60s communes largely ended up failing due to intra-societal melodrama and interpersonal conflicts (possibly with exceptions, I am no expert and have no research to back this up..). The first episode of Adam Curtis' "All Watched Over By Machines Of Loving Grace" makes the point that a lot of them were founded on Randian Objectivist ideals, with a 'heroic figure'  (usually a man) at their head, and is well worth having a look at for its interviews with ex-commune members.  There is also no over-riding reason for people to connect within their own communities though (as CatVincent mentioned is occuring in Todmorden) and come to their own arrangements re: bartering deals, land-use (those with available land team up with those with the skills to farm etc) etc . Some of this is <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17680904" >already happening in Greece</a> due to the partial failure/breakdown of the state that is happening there. <br /><br />As a commenter on <a href="http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2012/05/deconstructing-our-future.html#comment-511686" >Stross' blog put it</a>, all governing systems compete for fitness and there is a reason why corporate democracy has (until very recently at least) been proven to be the most stable and effective system we have, but I am sure that  evolutionary developements in our system of governance will arise, and hopefully they will be positive for the mass of the population.<br /><br />#SeaquestForSrs - I am a bit AC/DC about that. I can see that as the deep sea is massively under-explored the chances for scientific discovery are great, but another part of me thinks that it would easier and cheaper (though not necessarily ecologically responsible) to dredge material from undersea sand-bars and literally <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_reclamation#Habitation" >make new territory</a> than it would be to have undersea habitatation on anything other than a small scale for scientific research missions.<br /><br />#PayTheFarmers - There is an issue with farmers vs. the Supermarkets in UK over prices they can raise for produce, and the easiest thing for them to do would be to join together as co-operatives and use collective bargaining to drive up the prices they can fetch for their commodities. Unfortunately for UK farmers that kind of collectivism is tantamount to (gasp) <em >socialism</em>...<br /><br />#TakeCareOfTeachers - YES. SMALL CLASS SIZES! Of course that relies on decision-makers actually wanting the mass of the population having anything like a rounded education, and not just a sausage-factory where the next generation of Macjob fillers are churned out as unthinking and un-questioning as possible. There is this quote  from Mill: <br /><blockquote >A general State education is a mere contrivance for moulding people to be exactly like one another; and as the mould in which it casts them is that which pleases the dominant power in the government, whether this be a monarch, an aristocracy, or a majority of the existing generation; in proportion as it is efficient and successful, it establishes a despotism over the mind, leading by a natural tendency to one over the body.</blockquote><br />and this one from William T Harris (US Commissioner of Education, 1889) <br /><blockquote >Our schools have been scientifically designed to prevent over-education from happening. The average American [should be] content with their humble role in life, because they're not tempted to think about any other role.</blockquote> <br />that have always resonated with me. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333071#Comment_333071</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333071#Comment_333071</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 10:48:24 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>government spy</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Hey come on now, I was born with webbed feets.  They're not all that useful ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333100#Comment_333100</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333100#Comment_333100</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 15:30:54 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>allana</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Pix or it didn't happen! ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333103#Comment_333103</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333103#Comment_333103</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 15:44:55 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>allana</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ #TakeCareOfTeachers<br /><br />I think good teachers are often (not always) ones that get to specialize in a subject they love. Canadian public education has one teacher for 80% of the day for all kids under 13/14 (the other 20% being art, music, or French, generally). I have no idea if this is an efficient system for education; it seems designed more for social/behavioural monitoring and modifying. Secondary school is better, of course, but in smaller or cheaper schools a science teacher would often have to teach a computer class or something semi-related just to have a full workload. That sucks.<br /><br />Which leads me to: CORPORATE FUNDING! If we have specialized arts or science schools, we're not far off from the day that Microsoft starts sponsoring tech-heavy schools in cities, and maybe establishing extra-special private schools to funnel bright kids into (can't think of examples offhand, but I'm sure it's happening already). If the underlying mandate of public schools is to keep the majority of kids mediocre and underachieving, there will have to be a way to scope out potential bright minds and then steal them away from the general populace. It'll save public school teachers from having to style their lessons awkwardly around a huge range of learning speeds and styles, at least (but leave them playing flash cards with the dullards). <br /><br />Man I love segregation. But let's be honest, guys: <em >we can't all grow up to be whatever we want to be</em>. We need lots of service workers, tradespeople, and garbage collectors. Fact. We can try to make these things glamourous and attractive, and modify the salary expectations according to how miserable the workers will be, and keep intaking immigrants and trodding all over <em >them</em> ... But not everybody can get PhDs and tenure and live the high life. I'm not suggesting a Draconian world of aptitude tests and computerized sorting, but we have to provide a spread of talents. Figure THAT out. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333106#Comment_333106</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333106#Comment_333106</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 16:02:10 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>oldhat</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Glad that it went away, but any more disrespectful bickering will be turned in to script segments from a 1920s play of my choosing. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333107#Comment_333107</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333107#Comment_333107</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 16:03:16 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Magnulus</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ #Education (Yeah, I changed it. I should have changed it to start with, the topic got bigger as I wrote it)<br />I doubt that in most cases those quotes hold true. I refuse to believe (Because I'm a big ol' softy) that this is the INTENT, anyway. It's certainly an unfortunate effect of a very sad view of the people and their need for intellectual stimuli. Politicians look at schools and think "they cost a lot of money as it is and people seem to be doing OK, so... Not broken, don't fix?" And it kind of isn't BROKEN, people do still seem to gain the skills they need to get the jobs that are available, etc. It's just that the most cost-effective way of doing education is the most homogenised, least value-effective way of doing it.<br /><br />Here's the problem in a Better Future: More and more unskilled labour will be done automagically. We HAVE to start educating people better, because soon enough, there will be hardly ANY unskilled labour compared to what we have now. Checkouts at the grocery store are slowly being edged out by the self-checkouts, which usually have one person looking after four or even TWELVE machines on his/her own. Lower quality of service and a more annoying shopping trip, but it helps the bottom line of the company, so it will continue to happen, especially as the machines get "smarter".<br /><br />So what will people do? We need to find ways to employ them! We need them to fix the damned machines that will keep breaking, for one thing. In short, we NEED to start stimulating our children's brains, otherwise they will be obsolete by the time they grow up! Unless we're heading for one of the far future scenarios in The Accidental Time Machine where people are basically just born into being rich idiots who do nothing because they're all taken care of by a motherly AI.<br /><br />Then again, with stuff like DuoLingo and WolframAlpha and various online teaching aids, maybe the problem will take care of itself. Maybe more and more can be "automated" and thereby more easily customised? Perhaps the same amount of teachers is fine. Just give them the tools they need to be able to tailor their teaching to their classes and students online. I've seen some interesting things, though I can't remember specifics, as always...<br /><br />( Is there a "reference/quote storage app" to be had or something? Basically like advanced bookmarks for people who want to quote things they've read or just remember where the hell they read it.) ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333130#Comment_333130</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333130#Comment_333130</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Jun 2012 02:32:46 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>sneak046</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ #Education should of course be *much more* than mere preparing people for jobs. Too much focus is put upon schools being a proving ground for work, and not enough time spent of preparing kids to be rounded adults that can reason. Why is there so little teaching of *how to think*? <br /><br />Regarding employment/job shortages due to increasing autmagification, Market Economists will quote the Luddite Fallacy when it comes to discussing shortages in employment due to technological improvements. The theory behind the luddite fallacy is that any unemployment of individuals is outweighed by the number of jobs created "fixing the damned machines" as Magnulus puts it, or in jobs created by the increase in wealth that technological improvements make (i.e Technological unemployment does not become Structural unmployment).  <br /><br /><br />I for one though am hopeful that one Possible Better Future will see the Unrestrained-Market-as-God replaced by a post-market capitalism system of value circulation. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333136#Comment_333136</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333136#Comment_333136</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Jun 2012 03:40:42 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Nygaard</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ This seems like it needs to go here:<a href="http://grinding.be/2012/06/01/guest-post-joshua-ellis-revisits-the-grim-meathook-future/" > Joshua Ellis revisits the Grim Meathook Future.</a><br /><br />The point to take away being that no matter how well you craft your better future, the whole exercise is utterly pointless if it doesn't have room for six out of seven people in the world. How do you accomplish a new better future without making a New Better Bubble (TM)?<br />#Let them in ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333146#Comment_333146</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333146#Comment_333146</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Jun 2012 05:49:37 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>allana</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ So, wait. What? We're going to transfer unskilled or gross labour to machines, and them replace all that lost employment with machine maintenance? Does that sound farcical to anyone else? How unendingly dreary. This is that Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal cartoon, the one about code-writing machines deliberately including junk code to keep human debuggers from messing with the important stuff. What if it turns out to be not only more economically safe but also more psychologically beneficial just to use good ol' human power? I shouldn't even have to mention the physical benefits. <br />We are not a species made for sedentary jobs and immobile leisure. We are a species of fierce strong hunter gatherers, and while i object to repetitive labour, I abhor ever more strongly all jobs requiring ergonomic wrist-rests and access to Windows Solitaire. We should be better than this shit. <br />Education should be made benign - as in, done for one's own interest and not as wage determiner. This I fully support. But we need to make work, all work, from lowly to ivory-tower, fit ourselves, as humans and as societies. I'm an academic, but I'm also a hard labourer, and I'd be hard pressed to give up either. I need them both. A library card will not tell you how to learn, nor is a gym membership acceptable replacement for a grueling ten-hour day of back strain and inclement weather.<br />We can either make manual labour attractive or we can wait for the day when it becomes an esoteric form of self-fulfillment, like monasteries for reconnecting with the sweat glands. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333151#Comment_333151</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333151#Comment_333151</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Jun 2012 06:16:13 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>apefist</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ The only future for the earth is a conflict between Israel/US/UK against Iran/Russia/China becoming a global conflict and erupting into WWIII. The global economy will continue to sink deeper into this depression, because that's what it really is, there's no recovery and the lost jobs won't be replaced. It's an economic system based on perpetually increasing debt, impossible to get on top of or even maintain. This depression stifles R&D, not to mention basic health and human services, and the resulting unrest and eventual furor felt by the most affected majority of the population, can go nowhere because while they were scraping just to get by after losing their jobs and homes, their 1st, 4th, 5th, 7th, and 8th amendment rights have been stripped. Protesting as a group on federal, state, local, and some private property is now illegal, punishable by a 10 yr sentence in prison. And the police are militarized to respond to protests held legally on private property not protected by the law. As we plunge headlong into another world war and stagnate in a dead economy, as crucial public services are terminated, our future is giving in and eating our pets, then bugs once trucks can't transport food into bombed out regions of the country,  or economic disaster areas. We've peaked as a species, and as the US Empire collapses in on itself, destroying our global allies in the process, it's back to sticks and rocks before long. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333175#Comment_333175</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333175#Comment_333175</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Jun 2012 12:06:50 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Alan Tyson</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ ...okay, then.<br /><br />In the event that this very specific scenario does not come to pass, let's try to figure out how to keep living with a modicum of society and advancement, eh folks? To paraphrase a certain man with an eyepatch, until the world actually stops spinning, let's carry on as if it will continue. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333186#Comment_333186</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333186#Comment_333186</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Jun 2012 14:56:05 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>REL</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ #Videogames #Education<br />Would adding multiplayer to this create an increased standard of living?<br /><br /><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/06/03/magazine/innovations-issue.html#nytmag-innovation12" >32 Innovations That Will Change Your Tomorrow</a><br /><br />@Allana I agree, videogames are good for your brain. It can be a bit overwhelming sometimes, as most people who pay videogames refer to the standard FPS model of play (which has really evolved into a Madden-esque state of rehashing, hasn't it?) What kinds of games promote increased cognitive activity? I would say creative and mad things, like Katamari, Journey, and <a href="http://www.auntiepixelante.com/?p=507" >Chicanery</a> and surely there are other videogames that are original and new... ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333203#Comment_333203</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333203#Comment_333203</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Jun 2012 18:45:33 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>allana</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ @apefist, seems bleak<br /><br /><br />@REL: I'm gonna say just about everything from Tetris to Myst to Bioshock. Even the increased social-networking capabilities of phones could lead people to play more digital Scrabble and chess, which is a-okay by me. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333213#Comment_333213</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333213#Comment_333213</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Jun 2012 23:54:52 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Frowardd</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ I'm still really annoyed at these Evil Space Badgers. If we could just put aside our differences to nuke those fuckers out of the solar system, maybe one day we could get to mars. But sigh, it's not meant to be. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333275#Comment_333275</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=333275#Comment_333275</guid>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 Jun 2012 15:58:08 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>Kosmopolit</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ A couple of things a better future should have because they exist now but most of us don't benefit from them:<br /><br />1. Electronic wallets. Most people either have or know about transit cards - you preload them with money then wave them past a sensor to pay bus or train fares. In Hong Kong, where the first such system was invented, fast pood places, convenience stores and many other businesses accept them for payment. It's more secure than cash because you can log on to a website and cancel your card and transfer the balance if the card is lost or stolen, you can set it so it has an auto-top-up so you never run short of change. It helps businesses because they dont have to handle as much cash. <br /><br />The reason we don't all have this is pretty simple: the banks hate this system becaude it cuts out a large chunk of their transaction processing income and ATM fees. Twenty-odd years after these systems have been around they've kinda, sorta gotten on the bandwagon with Visa Paywave.<br /><br />2. Drug decriminalization: Portugal seems to have developed a model that works. Possession of virtually all drugs including Heroin, cocaine and PCP for personal use is not a felony (and the amounts that qualify as "personal use" are pretty generous.)  <br /><br />IIRC, the first time you're found in possession you get a warning notice; the second time within six months you get a small fine; third time within the same six month period you get mandatory rehab.<br /><br />The result has been reduction in drug use and an even bigger reduction in overdoses and in AIDS and Hep infection rates. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=334746#Comment_334746</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=334746#Comment_334746</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Jun 2012 00:25:00 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>sneak046</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ *Performs necromantic kuji-in to resurrect a moribund thread*<br /><br />@kosmo <br /><br />I have been put off commenting here for  while due to the <em >brusque</em> response to my last post... but I did have a couple of things I wanted to mention about both your points (which I feel are both valid and worthy of further discussion):<br /><br />1. I have a contactless payment system on my present bank debit card, but the system is supported in so few places that i've usually stuck it in the machine and typed in my pin before I've even noticed I could've just waved it at a sensor. Certainly it is here now but I think its opne of those things that is waiting for its time. <br />One thing does concern me though is that as demonstrated by the researchers that cracked the RFID chip in passports (I forget which countries' passports),  these things may not be 100% secure (but then it's hardly as if there is zero card-fraud through other methods at present). Perhaps faraday-cage wallets will become more commonplace too..<br /><br /><br />2. Since the 'War on Drugs' is so profitable (and probably provides political over for some more dubious dealings withing the US's sphere of influence), as much as I think it'd be better for the world's population, I cannot see that kind of Portuguese liberalisation occuring in too many places. Which is a shame because as you rightly state it appears that it is working as intended. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=334747#Comment_334747</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=334747#Comment_334747</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Jun 2012 00:51:38 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>sneak046</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ #Afrofuturism<br /><br />I am seriously no expert in this field, but having listened to <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00t4yn2" >this programme</a> by Lauren Buekes on BBC WS, I am fascinated by the wasy in which traditional culture is being fused with technology in places like Ghana, with their Sakawa Boys: <br /><br />From a <a href="http://motherboard.vice.com/2011/4/5/the-sakawa-boys-inside-the-bizarre-criminal-world-of-ghana%E2%80%99s-cyber-juju-email-scam-gangs" >vice article</a> about them:  <br /><br /><blockquote >Taking a page from cyberpunk, traditional West African Juju priests adapted their services to the needs of the information age and started leading down-on-their-luck internet scammers through strange and costly rituals designed to increase their powers of persuasion and make their emails irresistible to greedy Americans. And so “Sakawa” was born...<br /><br />...Sakawa has its own tunes, clothing brands, Sakawasploitation flicks, and even a metastatic backlash from Christian preachers and the press. When we were in Accra over the summer it was impossible to walk more than ten feet without seeing the word Sakawa in blood-red Misfits letters on a poster or tabloid, often accompanied by bone-chilling horrors of the photoshopped variety.<br /></blockquote> ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=334819#Comment_334819</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=334819#Comment_334819</guid>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Jun 2012 17:03:30 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>DC</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ On the Portuguese drugs liberalization, I'm sure a lot of countries would adopt it if they played their politics like ours did. In a country where the decriminalization of abortion and the recent same sex marriage were subject of discussions for endless weeks, it was surprising seeing this law into action without much fuzz from the public opinion. I think it was a combination of low profile chances in the law that disable the public opinion and, when the results started to show up, arguments couldn't be made against it. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=334843#Comment_334843</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=334843#Comment_334843</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Jun 2012 03:51:08 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>sneak046</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ ^^ hmm, sounds awfully like <a href="http://www.badscience.net/2012/06/heres-a-cabinet-office-paper-i-co-authored-about-randomised-trials-of-government-policies/" >Evidence Based Policy</a>. I approve.. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>A New Better Future</title>
		<link>http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=334870#Comment_334870</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://freakangels.com/whitechapel/comments.php?DiscussionID=10574&amp;Focus=334870#Comment_334870</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Jun 2012 14:58:05 -0700</pubDate>
		<author>allana</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ Was that another "brusque" directed towards me? It's hard to tell, since nobody really responded to your last post. ]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	
		</channel>
	</rss>