"The future's 10 Mind-blowing technologies about to emerge"

[Anomalocaris]

New technologies are always expensive at first, but usually the prices level out over time the more available they become.

This. Most technologies are expensive at first, as the inventors and investors seek to recover development costs and as supply is low at first. As the technology is improved and becomes easier to mass-produce, prices come down and it becomes more widespread and available to more income classes.

That depends on the nature of the technology, and what it must consume in order to function. Cost of technology only goes down dramatically over time if it is the application of the technology that had been scarce in the beginning, not what the technology must consume to function. An example is chemical rocket technology. In the beginning both the technology and what it consumes had been scarce. But since Sputnik chemical rocket technology is no longer scarce. Everyone and their uncle can now make a workable chemical rocket to put something into space. But what the chemical rocket technology consumes, prodigious quantity of chemical energy, remains scarce. This is why while cost of chemical rockets have come down, they remain frighteningly high, and while they will probably come down some more in the next decades, there is no prospect of their ever coming down dramatically.

[Drich]

New technologies are always expensive at first, but usually the prices level out over time the more available they become.

The question at the end of the video was something to the effect of 'who will be allowed to partake in this age reversing process with the ever growing threat of over population?'

The earth is finite. Meaning there is an upper limit to how many people can live here and their be enough food water and space.

The question asks as we approach these upper limits, why would we eliminate our only viable means of population control?

Meaning if people are still being born but are not dying because appearently at some point they will have little fountain of youth shots being sold at the corner store and everyone can get some... we will over populate and people will die due to over population.

The reality is. The rich and famous along with minds we hold as the key to the future will be given extended lives. Guys who work at Mcdonalds will have to face judgement like everyone else.

Again, your future prospects are not for everyone. Someone has to build this stuff in mass quanity to make it affordable for consumers. That means they have to be paid far less than what is considered to be affordable.

[MJ the Skeptical]

The question at the end of the video was something to the effect of 'who will be allowed to partake in this age reversing process with the ever growing threat of over population?'

It's a fixable problem. Overpopulation should not stop us from living longer and happier lives. Plus, if we start to get overpopulated we need to start thinking about not having as many kids and terraforming the moon for example.

The earth is finite. Meaning there is an upper limit to how many people can live here and their be enough food water and space.

So, we just ignore new technologies because we may run into roadblocks...No. That's small minded, we need to fix our problems, and I'm pretty confident once the old generations die off we can start to make some real progress instead of regressing.

The question asks as we approach these upper limits, why would we eliminate our only viable means of population control?

So you advocate short lives and death over solving the problem of overpopulation? you really are small minded. Especially since that's not the only "viable" solution for population growth.

Meaning if people are still being born but are not dying because appearently at some point they will have little fountain of youth shots being sold at the corner store and everyone can get some... we will over populate and people will die due to over population.

Seems like theists have a problem with living forever, it's the only way you can actually live forever, because there's no fucking afterlife. I just find it contradictory and ironic that people like you believe in religion for the reward of an eternity. But when we find an actual solution to death, people like you shut it down in favor of antiquated notions of the human condition. I mean, you'd be the guy back in the day protesting cars because it would put horse and buggy's out of business. It's time to move forward, not backwards. All you're doing is focusing on one problem instead of coming up with a better solution other than, we just need to die. No, we fucking don't.

The reality is. The rich and famous along with minds we hold as the key to the future will be given extended lives. Guys who work at Mcdonalds will have to face judgement like everyone else.

I guess you missed that part about technologies becomming more availabe the cheaper the materials and the beter the technology becomes. I mean the guy at McDonalds can afford a smart phone now, where as they couldn't years ago. You're right that rich people would have the first go at it, but poor people will get their hands on this stuff as well.

Again, your future prospects are not for everyone. Someone has to build this stuff in mass quanity to make it affordable for consumers. That means they have to be paid far less than what is considered to be affordable.

They're not my future prospects, they're everybody's. And I bet you, you will be using them as well, guaranteed, including living as long as you possibly can. When they say living forever, that doesn't necessarily mean you will live until the end of the universe. I'm sorry but, your objections to future technology makes you sound like an old man.

[Drich]

It's a fixable problem. Overpopulation should not stop us from living longer and happier lives. Plus, if we start to get overpopulated we need to start thinking about not having as many kids and terraforming the moon for example.

oh, boy. The eternal optimist.

You do know that their is a country in the world today who is facing overpopulation currently, right?

Do you know how they are handling the situation? It not by terraforming the moon. It is mandating strict regulations on children, it is terraforming middle eastern countries by diverting the nile river near its source to government held properties which is drying up the other countries in that region (which will mean war eventually) it also means turning it over population into the largest standing army on the planet and the largest slave labor force on the planet. (To make the goods you are so optimistic about.)

No thank you everyone should get one turn at bat and that's it.

So, we just ignore new technologies because we may run into roadblocks...No. That's small minded, we need to fix our problems, and I'm pretty confident once the old generations die off we can start to make some real progress instead of regressing.

how did you get that from what I said? I'm saying the new tech is good. It's just it will not benfit everyone. Just maybe the top 10% of the world, and those in whom that percentage wishes to share their goodies with.

So you advocate short lives and death over solving the problem of overpopulation? you really are small minded. Especially since that's not the only "viable" solution for population growth.

yes
This is the way of the world, since the beginning. Only those who fear death look to cheat it.

Seems like theists have a problem with living forever, it's the only way you can actually live forever, because there's no fucking afterlife.

for you guys your right..

I just find it contradictory and ironic that people like you believe in religion for the reward of an eternity.

maybe you don't quite understand what reward really is..
It's not eternity. That in of itself is a curse.
The reward is living with God for eternity. I have no desire to live in this life for eternity. This realm is as close to a satan run Hell as God will allow.

But when we find an actual solution to death, people like you shut it down in favor of antiquated notions of the human condition. I mean, you'd be the guy back in the day protesting cars because it would put horse and buggy's out of business. It's time to move forward, not backwards. All you're doing is focusing on one problem instead of coming up with a better solution other than, we just need to die. No, we fucking don't.

youre an idiot. At no point did I say I was against anything. Just because I apposed your foolish optimism does not mean I want to do away with what your optimistic about. All I wanted to do is poop on your idea that the whole world was going to benfit from what you think it will. If the whole world does not benfit from the technology of today, what makes you think we will be giving away the cutting edge stuff when on a global scale it cause far more problems than it fixes?

I am all for everything that is up and coming. I just want it to be top shelved to keep say the fountain of youth out of everyone's hands. I don't want everyone to have access to lab grown organs. I want the vast majority of people to live a given life span and die. Why cheat the future generations out of their turn at bat, just because dbags like you are afraid of death?

Now take a dbag like you and then marry in an Osama or the isis monsters... They too are apart of 'everyone' who should only be given on shot at life.

I guess you missed that part about technologies becomming more availabe the cheaper the materials and the beter the technology becomes. I mean the guy at McDonalds can afford a smart phone now, where as they couldn't years ago. You're right that rich people would have the first go at it, but poor people will get their hands on this stuff as well.

holy crap it like talking to a wall. At the end of the video there was a question about how smart it was to release any fountain of youth type of treatment on the general population, due to over population.. Do you not understand that the people developing this technology don't want everyone to have it because they see a serious down fall in putting it in the hands of everyone? That means there will be some sort of qualifier or reason to keep it from everyone.

So the question becomes who gets it... I simply pointed out the wealthy will. As that solution takes morality of picking and choosing out of the hands of the company who develops this technology, and places it on those want it.

They're not my future prospects, they're everybody's.

ahh, no..
The future only belongs to those who can afford it.

And I bet you, you will be using them as well, guaranteed, including living as long as you possibly can. When they say living forever, that doesn't necessarily mean you will live until the end of the universe. I'm sorry but, your objections to future technology makes you sound like an old man.

Again no objection to the future. Just the foolish notion that everyone will benfit from it. If you want to benfit from it then you better get moving, and find your niche that will make you the money you need to cash in the things you want to be apart of.
[/quote]

[MJ the Skeptical]

oh, boy. The eternal optimist.

You do know that their is a country in the world today who is facing overpopulation currently, right?

I didn't say we weren't experiencing overpopulation. Herp Derp. Why don't you address what I actually said about it being a fixable problem and not letting that problem get in the way of living longer and healthier lives.

Do you know how they are handling the situation? It not by terraforming the moon. It is mandating strict regulations on children..

I just brought up a possible future solution of terraforming the moon. Of course we need to worry about fixing this planet first. And discouraging the production of children is a great idea, more readily available birth control, and abortion.

No thank you everyone should get one turn at bat and that's it.

Yeah dude, every sperm is sacred right?

how did you get that from what I said? I'm saying the new tech is good. It's just it will not benfit everyone. Just maybe the top 10% of the world, and those in whom that percentage wishes to share their goodies with.

Which myself and others have already addressed, stop wasting my time.

yes. This is the way of the world, since the beginning. Only those who fear death look to cheat it.

Typical Christian, in favor of death and destruction over prosperity and progress. You fill out that stereotype perfectly. And it's not like we would actually live forever, that's a bit of hyperbole. We can't survive the end of the universe for example. So eternal life is really just a way of saying living as long as you can or want. Which I don't see how an rational person can be against. But then again, Christians usually aren't rational.

for you guys your right..

If you could prove it, there would be no debate. P.S. there's no afterlife for you either, you rot in the ground like all the other animals, you don't possess anything they don't have biologically. You're a deluded monkey who fears death so you cling to an afterlife fairy tale made up by bronze age goat herders instead of moving into the 21st century where the promise of a very long life is possible. You're the worst kind of antiquated obstructionist. You should just come out in favor of regression and be honest.

maybe you don't quite understand what reward really is..
It's not eternity. That in of itself is a curse.

How droll. You don't want an eternity as a human which has a real possibility, but you want an eternity with a fictional story book character that's not likely to be true at all. This is why you're still a contradictory hypocrite.

The reward is living with God for eternity. I have no desire to live in this life for eternity. This realm is as close to a satan run Hell as God will allow.

Yeah we get it, Christians want to suck God's cock and capitulate to him for an eternity. That wouldn't possibly get old or tedious at all. A celestial Kim Il-Sun for an eternity, you can have that. I will enjoy just being dead like I was before I was born. Also, if there's no free will in heaven than it's not really you in heaven now is it? Herp Derp #2.

youre an idiot. At no point did I say I was against anything.

You're*

Just because I apposed your foolish optimism does not mean I want to do away with what your optimistic about.

Opposed*

And if you're not optimistic about the future prospects of living for a long time, then I can't help you. You might as well live in a retirement home.

All I wanted to do is poop on your idea that the whole world was going to benfit from what you think it will.

Benefit*

But you think mankind will benefit from an old bronze age book with no evidence? but when science can come up with actual solutions you just bat your eyes like an old geezer, afraid of change. And man, for calling someone an idiot, you sure do have terrible grammar. The world will obviously benefit from future technology, to disagree means you disagree with scientific discoveries in history making the world a better place. Some of us have already addressed your retarded notion that this stuff will only be available to the rich.

If the whole world does not benfit from the technology of today, what makes you think we will be giving away the cutting edge stuff when on a global scale it cause far more problems than it fixes?

But more of the world benefits from technology every decade. We're not all connected yet. Technology is getting out to areas of the world where it never was before, it just takes time. Especially with the help of things like the internet for example, more information is getting to places it never was before, jobs are going to places they never were before.

I am all for everything that is up and coming. I just want it to be top shelved to keep say the fountain of youth out of everyone's hands. I don't want everyone to have access to lab grown organs. I want the vast majority of people to live a given life span and die. Why cheat the future generations out of their turn at bat, just because dbags like you are afraid of death?

This is why I said you're against this progress, you want people to die instead of moving forward. You're that guy back in the day that said I don't want people to live past their life span of 30 years, since that was the average age of people who died back in the bible days that your awesome book of fairy tales was written. You don't want people to have access to lab grown organs? Sorry, I tried to keep this civil, but you're a scumbag for saying that. Do you realize how many people die from organ failure and are stuck on the organ donor list? precisely because organs are scarce? but you're against lab grown ones that will be infinitely cheaper, fuck you. These technologies won't always been on the top shelf, we've already addressed that. I made a perfect analogy about smart phones that you obviously wanted to ignore because it undermines all this dumb shit you're rehashing.

Now take a dbag like you and then marry in an Osama or the isis monsters... They too are apart of 'everyone' who should only be given on shot at life.

Hey, if you're the one saying everyone should get a shot at life, then you shouldn't be hating on Osama or Isis, you hypocrite. How am I a douchebag for advocating life extension? so idiotic. Why don't you just go to heaven if you're so sure it's real. Do something noble with your sad regressive pessimistic life. Sacrifice your life saving people so you guarantee your spot in candyland.

holy crap it like talking to a wall. At the end of the video there was a question about how smart it was to release any fountain of youth type of treatment on the general population, due to over population.. Do you not understand that the people developing this technology don't want everyone to have it because they see a serious down fall in putting it in the hands of everyone? That means there will be some sort of qualifier or reason to keep it from everyone.

I love how you never address the points I make, especially about the smart phones being available to even the McDonalds worker now. We've given you the outline of how materials get cheaper, but you persist, did you huff paint chips or something? this is a really easy concept to grasp. So what's your solution to population control? because it's not going to go away if we do away with the prospect of living as long as we could. See, people like you have no solutions, just obstructionist mentalities. I recognize the problem with overpopulation but you seem to have no solutions. Just the fact that we die at a certain age is not going to guarantee that we fix the problem, so I don't see how anyone could be against living longer anyway, when we will come up with solutions to our problems like we always have. I don't need to be optimistic to see the future is going in a positive direction, and the world is becoming a better place.

So the question becomes who gets it... I simply pointed out the wealthy will. As that solution takes morality of picking and choosing out of the hands of the company who develops this technology, and places it on those want it.

Who gives a shit if the rich get it first, that's how supply and demand works, that doesn't mean we won't get it or prices won't go down. This concept just can't get through your thick skull.

no..The future only belongs to those who can afford it.

This has been explained to you to ad nauseum.

Again no objection to the future. Just the foolish notion that everyone will benfit from it. If you want to benfit from it then you better get moving, and find your niche that will make you the money you need to cash in the things you want to be apart of.

Who the fuck said everyone? Nice straw man though.

[Thumpalumpacus]

This. Most technologies are expensive at first, as the inventors and investors seek to recover development costs and as supply is low at first. As the technology is improved and becomes easier to mass-produce, prices come down and it becomes more widespread and available to more income classes.

That depends on the nature of the technology, and what it must consume in order to function. Cost of technology only goes down dramatically over time if it is the application of the technology that had been scarce in the beginning, not what the technology must consume to function. An example is chemical rocket technology. In the beginning both the technology and what it consumes had been scarce. But since Sputnik chemical rocket technology is no longer scarce. Everyone and their uncle can now make a workable chemical rocket to put something into space. But what the chemical rocket technology consumes, prodigious quantity of chemical energy, remains scarce. This is why while cost of chemical rockets have come down, they remain frighteningly high, and while they will probably come down some more in the next decades, there is no prospect of their ever coming down dramatically.

The other aspect is demand, because with large demand comes scaling of cost. The example you give here is not liable to see volume efficiencies any time soon, but other new technologies -- computers come to mind immediately -- where while demand is rising and R&D is on the cutting edge, prices still fall, because manufacturers have a predictable market allowing for predictable production curves.