Futurology > Will "The Matrix" become reality, and when? (1 Viewer)

[[icon]]

I have been doing some reading and thinking on this topic and I think I'm leaning toward Yes, and sooner than we think.

Crazy talk... maybe, maybe not. Some factors to consider:

1) What does the linear progression look like for "screen time" since 2000? With each passing generation we are spending more time "online" via misc devices.

2) What does our path look like for device interface? First it was computers, then mobile devices and now even smaller devices. For display of information, screens are still king but are slowly evolving. Augmented Reality / Virtual Reality are still in their infancy but are accelerating. "On eye" glasses and contact lenses are getting off the ground. Tech to "input" vision in place of eyes is also emerging (initially to help the blind see).

3) What about data input? Keyboards > Touchscreens > Talk to Text (Still emerging). Tech exists for people (mostly quads) to control input via mind, albeit inefficient this early in the evolution. That said, Neuralink is ready for human trials for direct brain interface... essentially bridging the mind to computer gap. Sure the tech is raw... but it's comming.

4) Where does our "drive" seem to be trending with regard to reducing interpersonal interactions? Drug use? Screen time? Hell.... Contactless delivery? People are de-socializing on a grand scale. Degree of interaction via device is rapidly rising.

5) What about the socio-economic conditions? How is wealth gap trending? It's increasing to the point you have to consider: Do desperate people bite a hook baited with "escape"? I think odds are high.


So... we are a society rapidly leaning toward digital interaction over personal... we're spending more and more time online, the amount of time spent in "Digital worlds" is increasing rapidly. The way we interface with computers (both viewing and input) are trending toward direct brain interface. Finally, an increasing percentage of society seems to be less happy / more challenged by day to day life in the physical world.

If we're being honest with ourselves, We TRULY only lack the interface. IMO, That will be here in full swing in more than 10 but less than 100 years. Then, we'll find out what percentage of the population would prefer an idyllic digital existence (ie San Junipero) over a challenging real one. What does that mean? I think a significant number of people will opt to at least spend a significant portion of time "plugged in"... and possibly some going in "full time".

Yes this all seems so far away, but all related technologies are effectively "here" in some form or fashion.

When you're careening toward a wall from a distance it seems to approach so slowly, for a while.... but toward the end, that wall sure seems to accelerate.

 

[belljr]

How do you know it's not real now

 

[IvanKaramazov]

How do you know it's not real now

This is what I came in here to post.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

If you were going to start up a program that simulated other people, what time period would you pick for your simulation? It can't be any time during the "we can simulate people" era, because then you would sims building sims of their own, and you'd run out of computing power. But it wouldn't be like the middle ages or colonial era either, because life sucked back then. You'd pick the best, most advanced time just before humans gained the technology to build sims.

How far off do you think this technology is relative to today?

 

[belljr]

How do you know it's not real now

This is what I came in here to post.

Maybe you're me on the other side

 

[Long Ball Larry]

Ray kurzweil alias?

 

[Galileo]

I think it is inevitable that we become integrated with technology as part of the evolutionary process...assuming we don't fully destroy ourselves first. It is the integration with, and dependency on, machine that will ultimately pave the evolutionary path of survival in a world that becomes less habitable for humans as we currently exist.

 

[Apple Juice]

It's easy for people to wave off these concepts because 1) They're a staple of science fiction and movies, which people associate with unreality, 2) Being cynical about tech is in fashion with cartoon characters like Musk and Zuckerberg bumbling around 3) As you point out, the tech is still raw and people lose sight of how exponentially fast technology advances now.

Assuming the tech progresses to a point where people can fully escape to an appealing digital world, I don't have a doubt in my mind that the majority of humanity would trade this world for another one.

 

[[icon]]

If you were going to start up a program that simulated other people, what time period would you pick for your simulation? It can't be any time during the "we can simulate people" era, because then you would sims building sims of their own, and you'd run out of computing power. But it wouldn't be like the middle ages or colonial era either, because life sucked back then. You'd pick the best, most advanced time just before humans gained the technology to build sims.

How far off do you think this technology is relative to today?

I think that ideal "time" would be different person to person. The beauty (and curse) of this is it could be any time for any person.. or it could be a total fantasy world.

I think brain interface will by a relatively safe and established process by 2030. I think computing power will be sufficient to power a true virtual existence on a user level, even if not fully indistinguishable.

That's really going to be the gateway / fork in the road.

When do I think there will be a full MM (Massively Multiplayer) virtual world indistinguishable from reality (via brain implant interface)? Maybe 2035-2040 range?

Mass acceptance / adoption as primary existence? Another 5 years? Maybe 10? Another hurdle will be exercise/nutrition.

 

[nirad3]

If anything, reality will mimic Idiocracy moreso than The Matrix.

 

[Jayrod]

About half of the world population lives in squalor a notch above Medieval times.

Millions of people are also involved in brutal wars and entire regions are war zones.

And then even the civilized nations are filled with infighting, corruption and greed.

Widespread adoption? Not in 100 years.

 

[[icon]]

If anything, reality will mimic Idiocracy moreso than The Matrix.

Appreciate the drive by but you're kinda making my point here... as reality gets increasingly ridiculous the temptation to escape increases

 

[[icon]]

About half of the world population lives in squalor a notch above Medieval times.

Millions of people are also involved in brutal wars and entire regions are war zones.

And then even the civilized nations are filled with infighting, corruption and greed.

Widespread adoption? Not in 100 years.

Until there's a means to monetize humans being in virtual.

But yes this is speaking about 1st world countries primarily, at least initially.

Your timeline is kinda funny though. You won't even recognize the world in 100 years. I think a lot of middle aged folks are clueless as to the accelerating rate of change we are seeing right now.

 

[Jayrod]

Your timeline is kinda funny though. You won't even recognize the world in 100 years. I think a lot of middle aged folks are clueless as to the accelerating rate of change we are seeing right now.

I won't recognize the US and Europe? Likely. Will Africa, the Middle East, Southeast Asia, etc. look much different? Not so sure. Tokyo and Laos look like they are in different centuries right now, as do New York City and rural Nigeria. Even as close as Mexico, there are thousands of people living without electricity in dirt floor shacks and there isn't a grocery store for 100 miles. Central and South America as well. Many parts of Africa have ZERO infrastructure and are subject to the whims of the local warlord. And then there are the "developing" countries and some countries actually going backwards developmentally (like Afghanistan & Iran) where getting anywhere near the kind of stability needed to generate a virtual lifestyle would be impossible as the government and society is currently structured.

I'm not clueless to the rate of acceleration of technological advancement, per se, just more aware of the logistical, structural and cultural challenges around the world than these types of predictions seem to want to acknowledge.

Humanity will still be very much the same in 100 years and THAT is the real roadblock. Greed, selfishness, cruelty, wars, famine, starvation, etc. aren't going to be gone in 100 years.

 

[shuke]

Statistically we most probably already are.

By the way, this is a very difficult concept to come to terms with. I caution watching this clip if your brain can't handle the concept of infinity.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Statistically we most probably already are.

By the way, this is a very difficult concept to come to terms with. I caution watching this clip if your brain can't handle the concept of infinity.

This sounds like a crazy idea that people come up with while stoned, but the argument in favor of the simulation hypothesis is extremely strong, and the arguments against it aren't nearly as compelling. For example, are there atoms in the known universe to build a computer that could simulate the reality that we experience today? Some people say no, but (a) there's no way I can evaluate that claim one way or the other, and (b) who knows what computing technology will look like 50 years from now, let alone 1000 years from now. Those sorts of arguments may turn out to be correct, and its simply impossible for any civilization to build a simulation, but I'm not even close to being persuaded of that and I don't see how anyone could be.

 

[SWC]

Statistically we most probably already are.

By the way, this is a very difficult concept to come to terms with. I caution watching this clip if your brain can't handle the concept of infinity.

i wish whoever programmed me would program me about a billion bucks and a 63 dodge charger so i could kick butt up and down main in watertown and have all the papershakers asking me for a ride up to mullins for an ice cream take that to the bank brohans

 

[[icon]]

I'm not clueless to the rate of acceleration of technological advancement, per se, just more aware of the logistical, structural and cultural challenges around the world than these types of predictions seem to want to acknowledge.

Humanity will still be very much the same in 100 years and THAT is the real roadblock. Greed, selfishness, cruelty, wars, famine, starvation, etc. aren't going to be gone in 100 years.

What logistical/structural challenges do you see in the way of this? Specifically?

 

[shuke]

Statistically we most probably already are.

By the way, this is a very difficult concept to come to terms with. I caution watching this clip if your brain can't handle the concept of infinity.

i wish whoever programmed me would program me about a billion bucks and a 63 dodge charger so i could kick butt up and down main in watertown and have all the papershakers asking me for a ride up to mullins for an ice cream take that to the bank brohans

Somewhere, in the fourth dimension 58,000 years from now, some kid and his buddies are having a laugh at how the AI made one of their characters say "take that to the bank" at the end of every sentence.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Statistically we most probably already are.

By the way, this is a very difficult concept to come to terms with. I caution watching this clip if your brain can't handle the concept of infinity.

He has recanted that after a 1 sentence rebuttal someone made to him that, frankly, is so obvious it's embarrassing that the "we are living in a simulation crowd" hadn't thought of it already.

- YouTube

Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.

www.youtube.com

He starts on the rebuttal around the 3:30 mark.

 

[shuke]

Statistically we most probably already are.

By the way, this is a very difficult concept to come to terms with. I caution watching this clip if your brain can't handle the concept of infinity.

He has recanted that after a 1 sentence rebuttal someone made to him that, frankly, is so obvious it's embarrassing that the "we are living in a simulation crowd" hadn't thought of it already.

- YouTube

Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.

www.youtube.com

He starts on the rebuttal around the 3:30 mark.

The fallacy in this rebuttal is that in each world that is able to generate a simulation, only one simulation is being created. Which is absolutely absurd and the it's embarrassing the nonbelievers hadn't thought of it already.

A simulation requires a certain level of computer power. That wouldn't be limited to a single entity.

Think about how many computers would exist in the world at the point at which computer power becomes great enough to do this. Let's call it a very conservative number of one billion. So civilization at that time creates one billion simulations. In each of those, there is going to be a point at which the species has not gotten to the point where creating a simulation is possible. So we could be in any of those billion simulations, or the original. At some point, each of those simulations will get to a point where they would be able to create a simulation. Again let's assume it's a billion each. So now we could be in any one of those 1,000,000,000,000,000,001 worlds (1,000,000,000,000,000,000 simulations plus the original).

I think you should easily see how quickly you can get to an infinite number of simulated worlds, any of which we could be a part of.

Again, it's a very uncomforting thing to think about, so I understand people's resistance to acknowledging it.

 

[Jayrod]

I'm not clueless to the rate of acceleration of technological advancement, per se, just more aware of the logistical, structural and cultural challenges around the world than these types of predictions seem to want to acknowledge.

Humanity will still be very much the same in 100 years and THAT is the real roadblock. Greed, selfishness, cruelty, wars, famine, starvation, etc. aren't going to be gone in 100 years.

What logistical/structural challenges do you see in the way of this? Specifically?

Functional and reliable power grids, internet connections, maintenance of basic survival needs, equipment manufacturing with its maintenance and replacement parts which leads to necessary supply chains.

When so many people are still trying to fulfill the base level of the hierarchy of needs, (i.e. food, water, shelter) making their way into a digital playground isn't an option. You can't live in a virtual world without your food/water/shelter needs covered and consistent electricity and an internet connection. You can't have advanced digital societies if you can't even make the real-world society fully functional. How are you going to get equipment manufactured, delivered and connected around the world and make it work and continue to work?

And how is all of this going to run without humans doing the bulk of the work creating and providing food and energy and making and repairing everything so it works? I'm not saying the technology can't or won't exist soon, but widespread adoption will have plenty of hurdles we probably haven't even thought of in the first world, much less worldwide.

 

[The Z Machine]

If you were going to start up a program that simulated other people, what time period would you pick for your simulation? It can't be any time during the "we can simulate people" era, because then you would sims building sims of their own, and you'd run out of computing power. But it wouldn't be like the middle ages or colonial era either, because life sucked back then. You'd pick the best, most advanced time just before humans gained the technology to build sims.

How far off do you think this technology is relative to today?

I think that ideal "time" would be different person to person. The beauty (and curse) of this is it could be any time for any person.. or it could be a total fantasy world.

I think brain interface will by a relatively safe and established process by 2030. I think computing power will be sufficient to power a true virtual existence on a user level, even if not fully indistinguishable.

That's really going to be the gateway / fork in the road.

When do I think there will be a full MM (Massively Multiplayer) virtual world indistinguishable from reality (via brain implant interface)? Maybe 2035-2040 range?

Mass acceptance / adoption as primary existence? Another 5 years? Maybe 10? Another hurdle will be exercise/nutrition.

Oh hell no am I going in for that. I'd rather be almost anywhere else.

 

[higgins]

I agree that it’ll be sooner (but not in the application most would think): convicted felons.

Want a guinea pig sample? Check
Want to decrease prison expenditures? Check
Carry on….

 

[Leroy Hoard]

Someone should check with Captain Pike and see how the Talosians are treating him.

 

[lakerstan]

Unless traveling faster than light ever becomes a reality (current science says no), the idea of colonizing other planets will not happen. We don’t collectively seem to have any interest in preserving this planet, so we will need to look to artificial means to find any kind of peace.

I suspect there will be a time where most of our interaction with other humans will be virtual and not in person. Oh wait…