

We live in the future - grey-area
https://medium.com/things-ive-written/we-live-in-the-future-041-4f833f8c475e

======
88e282102ae2e5b
So now that we're in the future, we're able to:

    
    
      * eat at a restaurant
      * take a taxi
      * buy a cup of coffee
      * listen to the radio
      * get a traffic update
      * purchase used bicycles
      * talk to our family and see their photos and videos
      * view more photos
      * keep a daily journal
      * order takeout
      * listen to music
      * get groceries delivered
      * send packages to other cities
      * hire a maid
      * keep track of what our babies are eating
      * watch TV
      * hear what celebrities have to say
      * hire a personal trainer
      * read the news
      * read a book
      * get directions
      * make long-distance phone calls
      * purchase tickets to a show
      * rent a car
      * book a hotel
    

The way I'm summarizing this may seem unfair, but in a century or two, when
humans are impervious to disease and not confined to a single planet, that's
about how ridiculous it will seem that this was deemed to be exciting.

------
daviross
Were there ever an article which confirmed "Hey, we're definitely headed for
Gibsonian Shadowrun-style future", this'd be it. I mean, sure, if you have the
money, you can be king-of-the-world like he describes.

After all, as the quote goes, _" The future is already here — it's just not
very evenly distributed."_

And watch the distribution tilt on.

------
CaptainSwing
I get the hype. It IS amazing and we shouldn't forget that. I too am sometimes
swallowed in the euphoria of what we have created and what we will create, the
possibilities open to us, and those others just around the corner.

And I mean it when I say I don't mean to be a spoil-sport, but as you say
yourself, it's not all good.More specifically, the good and the bad are not
evenly distributed. Where the economy gives with one hand it takes with the
other. When a labour saving technology is introduced to reduce prices, and
increase ease of access, to the consumer, somebody becomes unemployed, or is
forced into situation of job insecurity.

Without confronting hard questions about the distribution of value generated
by new technologies this tech-euphoria is a purely self indulgent act. In an
age where some of us have access to every book ever written on our phone,
people lack access to a decent education. While some of us can order a 'lyft'
in minutes to get to work, others struggle to pay the bus fare for the 2 hour
commute for their minimum wage job. While airbnb allows some of us to travel
the world meeting interesting people with more ease than ever before,
thousands are homeless on the streets of San Francisco. While some order home
cooked meals to their door, others starve.

I say this not to attack the euphoria. We ARE living in the future. We ARE
creating the future. But the future, as the past, is composed of great
contradictions. The euphoria we feel for that which is possible must confront
a great anger at the grim reality of increasing inequality.

That we have the technology required for the whole human race to live in
health, dignity, and security is nothing new. Since the end of the 19th
century people have been celebrating the human races' liberation from toil,
and its access to the fruits of our collective labour. (My personal favourite
example is Kropotkin's "conquest of bread", [http://libcom.org/library/the-
conquest-of-bread-peter-kropot...](http://libcom.org/library/the-conquest-of-
bread-peter-kropotkin), published in 1906) The question which hangs is still
that of distribution. How do we evenly distribute both the labour required and
the spoils of that labour such that nobody goes without?

Whenever we think "damn, I got it so good", we should also be thinking "why do
some still have it so bad?", or "how can society be organised in such a way
that we can all benefit from this?"

Without this critical response to the great technological developments of our
age we run the risk of losing our selves in a "filter-bubble" of those who
share our privilege, and with that loose sight of the full potential of the
technologies we use and create.

