Edit: the full video is now here - archive.org/details/future-living-2025 As a child, I was fascinated by documentaries about science, technology, and the future. I still vividly remember the clip of the Japanese space tourism SSTO "Kankoh-maru" at 8:52, and the funky electronic soundtrack that was playing. Also, 4:55 (in the full documentary) predicted VTubers.
@@rootz420 Predictions of the future from the past can often be exaggerated, but occassionally they can be spot-on. I would love to see cheaper space travel and I hope organizations like SpaceX succeed in that goal. Also, I'm the opposite of a technophobe but I understand privacy concerns with "smart homes." I'd rather use a keyboard & mouse or a touchscreen than talk to my devices.
Seeing all the things that they had back in 2002 just makes me think how little we progressed. They had VR, cell phones, flat screen TVs, alternative fuel for cars, solar panels, tablets, etc. It looks to me like all we did was shrunk it down and smashed everything into one device. Shoot, even some of those face graphics look only a little dated.
Yeah many of those things did exist in 2002 but were not commonplace yet because they weren't practical yet and were just too danged expensive! I remember flat screens costing THOUSANDS back then. The last 22-23 years made most of those things more common and affordable for everyone!
Update: it's back! Not bad, definitely got how we'd interface with tech wrong but concepts were close. Also shout-out to my boy Ken Levine, wonder if that segment had any early dev Bioshock footage
I always love these projections into the near future, like this one, or Walter Cronkite's "The 21st Century" done on CBS in 1967. As we see how our time is depicted, the forecasts are spot on one moment, and a total hoot the next. The most common faulty tendency of shows about the near future (meaning in the lifetimes of most of the audience) is a presumed benevolence in the role of these technologies in our lives. It's all about helping children learn, making our food healthier, or helping Jenny decide what college to attend. In reality, high tech becomes something that sells our data, puts more HFCS into our food, and of course greatly increases the income gap, making benevolence far less likely. Another telling thing about these futurist programs: The children in the first home are Jenny (born about 2002) and Tom (born about 2004). Children were not likely named such traditional monikers during the decade of the 2000s. Realism would have them Emily and Trey, or Taylor and Justin. The movie Mission to Mars had two characters named Jim and Maggie who would have been U.S. kids born in the mid 1980s. Also classically name anachronistic.
I'm not one of those "all tech is bad and dystopian, we must return to the past" people, but I recognize that it has the potential to be used in corrupt or benevolent ways.
Actually I remember watching something when I was a young adult (I’m 61 now) that talked about how we would have influencers but what they envisioned was extremely popular people who would have product placements in their homes and person. That was probably in the late 80’s. Pretty amazing that they even had the concept
They aren't true AIs my guy, they're VIs that people pretend are true AI. They can't think or operate on their own nor do they possess anything resembling a consciousness.
We have the technology now for a completely self driving car, and an infrastructure to manage it. One thing has slowed down the process: private enterprise. Most of the tech companies today are working on it internally. There is no collaborative effort.
i think the biggest thing this doc got wrong (it wasn't the tech, since the tech was far along its way in development) was how interfacing with computers so much was going to make people more emotionally available and understanding 🤣
I made a Thread about it in The Lost Media Wiki Forum btw. It’s not exactly the best analysis on it as it was made before the Article on the LMW was even updated.
By about the 15 minute mark, it is clear what the motif of the show is. Until then it was hard to understand whether Rosalind Picard and Keith Waters were supposed to be talking as though it is 2025 or in the time this was produced, 2002.
It has a similar format to the less-obscure Discovery Channel documentary, _2057_ , which had a fictional plot in the future combined with real-world segments from 2007.
Man, this didn't age well 😂 Although they got a few things eerily right, in the big picture, surprisingly little has changed since 2002. And most of the things in this video that has actually been made into reality (like Google Glass, metaverse, smart cupboards that order new food for you) has flopped like crazy. Anyway, it was a fun watch 😃
It was a simple story. I asked about it on the lostmedia subreddit in late 2019 and it got noticed over four years later by someone who had a recording.
seems that their space prediction was backwards. In reality, it appears that people will begin travelling to space because the cost of launch is going way down because of very good cargo rockets instead of passenger rockets.
Edit: the full video is now here - archive.org/details/future-living-2025
As a child, I was fascinated by documentaries about science, technology, and the future. I still vividly remember the clip of the Japanese space tourism SSTO "Kankoh-maru" at 8:52, and the funky electronic soundtrack that was playing. Also, 4:55 (in the full documentary) predicted VTubers.
Whats ur opinion on how we have progressed
@@rootz420 Predictions of the future from the past can often be exaggerated, but occassionally they can be spot-on. I would love to see cheaper space travel and I hope organizations like SpaceX succeed in that goal. Also, I'm the opposite of a technophobe but I understand privacy concerns with "smart homes." I'd rather use a keyboard & mouse or a touchscreen than talk to my devices.
Yea me to but shits still the same yet crazy
Seeing all the things that they had back in 2002 just makes me think how little we progressed. They had VR, cell phones, flat screen TVs, alternative fuel for cars, solar panels, tablets, etc. It looks to me like all we did was shrunk it down and smashed everything into one device. Shoot, even some of those face graphics look only a little dated.
Yeah many of those things did exist in 2002 but were not commonplace yet because they weren't practical yet and were just too danged expensive! I remember flat screens costing THOUSANDS back then. The last 22-23 years made most of those things more common and affordable for everyone!
Saving this to watch on New Year's Day next year to see how much they got wrong
Update: it's back! Not bad, definitely got how we'd interface with tech wrong but concepts were close. Also shout-out to my boy Ken Levine, wonder if that segment had any early dev Bioshock footage
I always love these projections into the near future, like this one, or Walter Cronkite's "The 21st Century" done on CBS in 1967. As we see how our time is depicted, the forecasts are spot on one moment, and a total hoot the next. The most common faulty tendency of shows about the near future (meaning in the lifetimes of most of the audience) is a presumed benevolence in the role of these technologies in our lives.
It's all about helping children learn, making our food healthier, or helping Jenny decide what college to attend.
In reality, high tech becomes something that sells our data, puts more HFCS into our food, and of course greatly increases the income gap, making benevolence far less likely.
Another telling thing about these futurist programs: The children in the first home are Jenny (born about 2002) and Tom (born about 2004). Children were not likely named such traditional monikers during the decade of the 2000s. Realism would have them Emily and Trey, or Taylor and Justin.
The movie Mission to Mars had two characters named Jim and Maggie who would have been U.S. kids born in the mid 1980s. Also classically name anachronistic.
I'm not one of those "all tech is bad and dystopian, we must return to the past" people, but I recognize that it has the potential to be used in corrupt or benevolent ways.
Face time lol
See you in 2025 everyone
Yup in 2 more mouths
Heyy
I’ve been looking for this, thanks!
6:44 it predicted Apple Vision Pro
No way they predicted vtubers
This part was aged well
aged like fine wine
Actually I remember watching something when I was a young adult (I’m 61 now) that talked about how we would have influencers but what they envisioned was extremely popular people who would have product placements in their homes and person. That was probably in the late 80’s. Pretty amazing that they even had the concept
Meta(AR), chatgpt, occulus(vr), smartphones, smartwatches, alexa, generative AI, etc. for 2025
Now add your predictions here for year 2050---->
They aren't true AIs my guy, they're VIs that people pretend are true AI. They can't think or operate on their own nor do they possess anything resembling a consciousness.
This is raw, potent, hauntology
It feels like a time capsule that has been rediscovered at the right moment.
We have the technology now for a completely self driving car, and an infrastructure to manage it. One thing has slowed down the process: private enterprise. Most of the tech companies today are working on it internally. There is no collaborative effort.
i think the biggest thing this doc got wrong (it wasn't the tech, since the tech was far along its way in development) was how interfacing with computers so much was going to make people more emotionally available and understanding 🤣
I made a Thread about it in The Lost Media Wiki Forum btw. It’s not exactly the best analysis on it as it was made before the Article on the LMW was even updated.
By about the 15 minute mark, it is clear what the motif of the show is. Until then it was hard to understand whether Rosalind Picard and Keith Waters were supposed to be talking as though it is 2025 or in the time this was produced, 2002.
It has a similar format to the less-obscure Discovery Channel documentary, _2057_ , which had a fictional plot in the future combined with real-world segments from 2007.
I’ll look for that.
Man, this didn't age well 😂 Although they got a few things eerily right, in the big picture, surprisingly little has changed since 2002. And most of the things in this video that has actually been made into reality (like Google Glass, metaverse, smart cupboards that order new food for you) has flopped like crazy.
Anyway, it was a fun watch 😃
All I need is a PC, smartphone, and a gaming console. I personally don't care that much about all the IoT smart home devices.
Amazing what they got right
it would have been a relative easy prediction 23 years and it was already internet era in 2002
A few things came true
Id rather see a video about discovering this piece of lost media tbh
It was a simple story. I asked about it on the lostmedia subreddit in late 2019 and it got noticed over four years later by someone who had a recording.
Too bad we went the opposite direction and focused on the entertainment and capitalization of technology, not the use case.
@knowledgehusk dude I don't know how this ended on my algo but here you go content GOLD
seems that their space prediction was backwards. In reality, it appears that people will begin travelling to space because the cost of launch is going way down because of very good cargo rockets instead of passenger rockets.
2:12 - Well owning a high-tech house or house at all is a fantasy, although there's quite a few things already that sound too familiar._
No tattoos, no texting, no one says, "Bruh, that's dope AF."
🤔@@brianarbenz1329
Well,IT'S 2025 NOW AND THIS DOES NOT AGE WELL!!!!!
Is this on archive yet?
we should go back and just stop the madness