Yea this. It’s the cigarettes of our generation. “I don’t know, everyone was doing it back then”, we’ll all say.
And our blind acceptance of it all, to the point of allowing it to replace journalism and politics, will be seen as dumb in the same way we now breath in some cigarette smoke and see it as obviously unhealthy.
I don't know about that. Younger millenials that grew up with social media are having kids and I see them posting about it.
For better or worse, I think social media is here to stay in some form or another. Maybe theyll fight harder to put some limits on it but I'm skeptical
Even when the US was down to like 20% smokers, in some European countries it was in the high 40s. Social media will DEFINITELY stick around. The question is how it's viewed.
I agree with you fundamentally. How do you feel about social media that is decentralized, open source, and non-corporate like Lemmy, Friendica, Pixelfed, et? I think these decentralized platforms are much less toxic because toxic people quickly get banned and shared with others. Furthermore, I think that with proper education of what social media is and what the positives and negatives are - including adverse consequencies - could be very beneficial. When social media is done in a positive way, it can be a great way to build friendships and exchange ideas and information. That much said the corporate social media is awful and in no way would I want to subject children to it as it could set them up for psychological trauma with real and lasting consequences to their mental health.
Would still not expose my kids. Anonymity brings out the worst in folks. And social media gets used for bullying no matter the platform.
As an adult, able to practice some opsec, and kcomfortable with their sense of self. Fine.
As kids, mine won’t have access. I have had family comment because we ask for our kids not be to put on Facebook. They understand a bit more now, 10 years later, but only to a point.
This isn't social media. I don't know you and I can't pretend to know you. This is a discussion board/ bulletin board/ forum dressed in new clothes, and I'm cool with that.
It's just not sustainable. Lab-grown meat is here, it just needs to get to scale, get a bit cheaper and boom. Farming and killing animals for food will be obsolete.
This is the first thing that came to my mind, too. I'm a omnivore myself and admittedly love my meat, but it's very bad for the environment and I can't deny the ethical concerns are there. At the very least, I can see low key vegetarianism being the norm in 20 years, where the norm would simply be to not have meat products, and meat might instead be a more niche diet or simply not the norm.
If lab grown meat manages to become scalable enough, I can also see that nearly completely replacing "real" meat. Once it's at least as affordable, I think "real" meat's days would be numbered. It'd become a thing only for purists/elitists/exotic diners. I would even expect that lab grown meat would eventually become cheaper than "real" meat simply because it would be far faster to grow and take fewer resources than to grow an entire animal to adulthood.
As an aside, would labe grown meat be considered vegan? I think it would be since no animal is harmed in the making of it. I imagine many existing vegans wouldn't want to eat something that tastes like meat, but it would be the thing that converts practically everyone else. I sure don't see why I'd ever want to eat "real" meat again if I could get a comparable lab grown meat that doesn't harm animals and is better for the environment. That's just a win win.
Lab grown meat is grown from cell cultures that were taken from animals that were not capable of consenting to donate these cells.
Hardcore vegans will likely still despise it, but for a lot of less hardcore vegan people it might become an option, especially if marketing hides the origin.
IMHO it's more important that the carbon footprint of growing cell cultures is bigger than that of growing animals. Unless this changes, lab grown meat is not an option to fight global warming.
I think in the grand scheme of things, if you have to ask if something is vegan, it’s probably not worth worrying about too much. Perfect not being the enemy of good and all that.
This definitely. For ethical or cost-effective reasons. I think price is going to be the main incentive. If its a dollar less a pound for lab grown hamburger and options at fast food outlets - we'll definitely be there. Real meat will become the new "fancy food" - wasteful and indulgent spending.
When the quality and cost of labgrown meat matches the real thing - we’ll see the tables turn. Especially if they’re able to produce various *cuts^ and styles.
Traditionally grown meat will go the way of vinyl. Slowly fall out of popularity, then eventually become a status good, popular among aficionados, ignoring its actual inferiority in blind tastings. Calling it now, in 25 years, most US beef will be Kobe style, "we brushed our cows' hair and sang it lullabies" and differentiated by marketing.
Even beyond that, I wouldn't underestimate the power of cultural change. From what I can tell, drugs, sex and clearly defined gender identities are all on the decline in the younger generations in the west. I'm not sure there's any good or clear external force pushing this. I think it's just change. When it comes to eating meat, it's pretty easy to start thinking through why you don't need to do it as much as the typical western diet does, which feels pretty ripe for some form of merely cultural change.
My money is on this one. Once we find a more sustainable way to get meat, and that scales to the globe, whatever that method is, I think the idea of keeping animals only to kill then will quickly be viewed as abhorrent.
Likely won't be as quick as within 20 years, however. Lots of companies currently making a fortune selling meat who will stand in the way of that.
I think this is the one. It's this generation's Napster, but the difference is it's not Britney Spears and Metallica getting robbed. It's every artist who ever posted their work to the Internet, and that's a huge, huge deal.
Most modern music is a collection of sounds and samples made by other people put together to create a new track. Then they sing over it using autotune. That has been accepted and normalized by the masses.
I agree with the first two, but the third one will happen only when most things catch on fire during the peak hot times. Workers in Texas don't get water breaks in the current heat wave.
There really is no need to haul 3 tons of steel around with you, and as more and more extreme weather events happen you'll have more and more people looking around for others to blame, and oversized cars which are clearly unnecessary for work (especially the ones with Internal Combustion Engines) make for big very visible targets, with the added factor that in some places they're seen as conspicuous displays of wealth (and flaunting wealth will be another thing that's likely to become frowned upon within the next 2 decades).
Not saying that SUVs are all to blame or even that the rich ride them (in my experience they're more the cars of a certain middle class), but they're in that spot of being abundant enough and yet only a minority of cars, easy to spot, often imposing in a showoffish way and logically more poluting that smaller cars, all this right when the impact of Global Warming is really and properly starting to be felt, something which at the current rate will get much worse in 2 decades.
Also, unlike big oil companies SUV owners don't have PR departments with hundreds of millions of dollars of budget to sway the press and swindle the useful idiots.
This thread title is unfortunately about what "you think will" not "you hope and wish and pray will", so super hard disagree. Electric cars are actually going bigger to account for huge batteries, and heavier because of them. Given that's the upswing I find it hard to predict a sudden shift to smaller cars.
The only way it happens (and 20 years is a very long time, so it's possible) is if cars become so expensive and mostly subscription model based like everything else, that car ownership goes down. If driverless electric cars become fleet vehicles in cities, you'd definitely see smaller cars becoming more common to have more on the road and privately replace public infrastructure because we can't invest in that in the USA. So like Uber just illegally ran taxi services in many jurisdictions until it became too popular to fail, expect the same thing from driverless car fleets, a couple of which will get bought by Uber or Lyft. Young people are driving WAY less, so if they prefer to hail a direct driverless taxi to their destination and not pay to own a car, then the bulk of vehicles on the road could downsize. Private passenger cars though, would start being used for more long haul driving instead of the 99% short trips they're currently used in, so I don't see any downward size pressure on those.
Well, there have been a number of announcements of higher density energy storage technologies and that's the direction things have been moving towards already with electric cars (in less than a decade ranges doubled with similarly sized cars), so I don't think there is at all a trend for larger vehicles in that segment due to such pressures.
From what I read (which was not specifically for electric cars) is that SUVs are simply more profitable for manufacturers, hence their investment in designing and heavilly promoting them.
I hope so. I was about to join the smaller end of the SUV crowd, but then I test drove a van. We have a van now. Even more space, better efficiency, and less expensive to buy. Just had to let our pride take a hit and drive the uncool-parents-mobile.
yeah right americans will totally overcome car-based infrastructure brainwashing and learn to hate the thing that they base their identity on totally
just like the confederate flag, totally died out when racism became uncool. and I think you're especially accurate that a widescale global disaster will definitely change people's thinking, that always happens and never redouble their biases with insane conspiracy theories driven by billionaire backed media campaigns
You're disputing something I didn't actually state.
I very explicitly went for SUVs because I actually believe the same as you when it comes to cars in general: 20 years is far too little time for people to completelly turn away from the, especially in car-loving countries with horrible public infrastructure for anything else, like the US.
Sacrificing a minority segment of the car market to appease the masses is not all that hard in 2 decades, whilst completelly changing the transportation infrastructure is damn near impossible.
I don't know. You don't see many electric stationwagons around and people will want big boots after fossil cars are history. I really really hope you're right though.
We bought a crossover earlier this year and love it, but I would have preferred to get a station wagon if they still existed. My parents had a Camry station wagon when I was a teenager and that thing was amazing.
There is also the shitty situation where because everything on US roads right now are big it actually makes smaller cars less safe in collisions due to relative mass with a likely other party. Also being at eye level with headlights kind of sucks.
Current giganto tax-loophole pickups, sure. I drive a 97 standard bed, mostly for hauling (not a daily). It's a great vehicle for the job. There's probably a couple of safety features I wish it had but "be bigger than any potential collision target" isn't one of them.
Idk man, I think motorcycles will become more and more popular, if there is more environment friendly people in the future they will probably switch to motorcycles and scooters. they are cheaper than a car (especially a used electric car, where the battery will potentially need to be replaced), their fuel efficiency is great, and are smaller than cars, which fit the urbanization trend of being more compact.
ICE motorcycles are loud and their emissions are difficult to filter properly due to size and weight economy. This makes them a much bigger nuisance than electric equivalents, and I think attitudes will shift to reflect this.
Completely disagree, but if you haven't been around for at least a couple of sets of twenty years I can see why you would think this.
Someone else gave a great set of things that were different, but really, twenty years ago was almost completely different in nearly every dimension of life I can remember.
In 2003 not only was gay marriage not legal, gay sex and relationships were illegal where I live, and was punishable by prison time.
In 2003 most of the country wasn't online, pagers were more common than cell phones, and 3DFX VooDoo graphics cards were still a thing.
In 2003 I used to smoke inside my community college's cafeteria, where people ate because it was the designated smoking area.
In 2003 minimum wage was $5.15 nationwide, and gas was just a little over a dollar.
In 2003 people didn't use laptops in school and electronics were confiscated on site, sometimes teachers would 'lose' them and you never got it back, and somehow that was an expected outcome - I lost a laser pointer that way.
In 2003 casual homophobia was mainstream, all your friends, and probably you would be making gay jokes, and transphobia was not a concept. I thought transgender people were the same thing as intersex, I didn't know gender transition was possible.
American society was post 9/11 and highly patriotic, even liberal people were unusually patriotic, and politics were probably the most 'neutral' that I've ever seen, it was nothing like they are now, but in general things trended towards cultural conservatism.
I remember being an outcast because I didn't believe in God, and people would casually tell me I was going to go to Hell.
Nah, 20 years is an entirely different cultural paradigm.
23 years ago offices buildings were not locked. No doors were locked. Zero. You didn't need a badge to be in the building. Now in most places you swipe through every single door and you need a badge on a lanyard.
Voodoo cards were largely irrelevant to new buyers by 2001. The Vodoo 5 line was launched in 2000 and wasn't a terrible value, but then Nvidia launched the GeForce 3 in early 2001 and ate their lunch. 3dfx went defunct in 2002 and their assets were bought up by Nvidia.
But your point is completely valid, culture moves slow even when business and technology don't.
I don't know how old you are but I lived through a completely different experience than you...
I'd been selling and repairing computers for 6+ years by 2003 and had been in the workforce many years before that. I can assure you people were definitely using laptops in schools (as I sold them to them)... Maybe not as ubiquitously as they do now but it was already quite common.
I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on how much things have changed since then ... Now, if you want to go back 30 or 40 years then I can definitely agree we've seen some significant changes.
Hell, the first time I flew out of the country I didn't even need photo ID much less a passport.
I think basically every single top level comment has zero understanding of what a short time 20 years actually is.
I also expect almost everything that is acceptable today will also still be in 20 years, including nearly every example suggested in this discussion.
The world simply does not change that fast as a general rule.
In 2003, you could still smoke indoors in many states/countries who have since made it illegal.
In 2003, cannabis and homosexuality was illegal in many more countries than it is now.
In 2003, there were many more TV shows/movies with ingrained sexism than there are now.
In 2003, having hundreds of "online friends" meant you were a social recluse who only spent time on IRC/MSN messenger.
In 2003, if you met a significant other online, you came up with an elaborate story to hide it.
In 2003, most people had a paper map of the streets folded up in their glove compartment.
In 2003, people still remembered phone numbers, phones all had removable batteries, every phone company had a different OS/charging cable, and no phone had a screen >6 inches big.
(cheating a little here, but I would be remiss not to mention this) In 2000, it wasn't illegal to bring a full water bottle into a plane.
Thanks, but I remember things from 20 years ago and this is an exaggeration in many ways... Or perhaps I should say multiple exaggerations.
Things were far more noticeably different 40+ years ago (which I also remember).
Oh, and for what it's worth, it's still not illegal to bring a full water bottle on a plane. You just can't bring one through security so you have to buy it in the airport after the checkpoints.
I agree, but we should also remember that time is relative.
In under 100 years we went from "holy shit our balsa wood plane flew 250 feet" to "one small step for man".
Completely disagree, but if you haven't been around for at least a couple of sets of twenty years I can see why you would think this.
Someone else gave a great set of things that were different, but really, twenty years ago was almost completely different in nearly every dimension of life I can remember.
In 2003 not only was gay marriage not legal, gay sex and relationships were illegal where I live, and was punishable by prison time.
In 2003 most of the country wasn't online, pagers were more common than cell phones, and 3DFX VooDoo graphics cards were still a thing.
In 2003 I used to smoke inside my community college's cafeteria, where people ate because it was the designated smoking area.
In 2003 minimum wage was $5.15 nationwide, and gas was just a little over a dollar.
In 2003 people didn't use laptops in school and electronics were confiscated on site, sometimes teachers would 'lose' them and you never got it back, and somehow that was an expected outcome - I lost a laser pointer that way.
In 2003 casual homophobia was mainstream, all your friends, and probably you would be making gay jokes, and transphobia was not a concept. I thought transgender people were the same thing as intersex, I didn't know gender transition was possible.
American society was post 9/11 and highly patriotic, even liberal people were unusually patriotic, and politics were probably the most 'neutral' that I've ever seen, it was nothing like they are now, but in general things trended towards cultural conservatism.
I remember being an outcast because I didn't believe in God, and people would casually tell me I was going to go to Hell.
Nah, 20 years is an entirely different cultural paradigm.
I think that you are the one who has zero understanding of how fast culture can change. There are a LOT of things that were considered acceptable 20 years ago but aren't today.
I know it's just conventional wisdom, but among those who look back and forward and think about this stuff, it's been common conventional wisdom for a century that 20 years is an exceedingly long time for change.
I like Bill Gates' quote the best, "People often overestimate what will happen in the next two years and underestimate what will happen in ten."
Technological change is far different than social change in terms of what's accepted and what isn't.
Most of the people commenting to me have gotten caught up in that.
Most of the things people are pointing out in terms of social change in acceptance are things like gay marriage, smoking, and cannabis legalization.
What they fail to understand is that attitudes on many of those social issues can be somewhat cyclical and that the drastic changes they are seeing may be more surface level than as deep as they think.
Consider the overturn of Roe v Wade to understand how some of the shorter term "changes" in what's socially acceptable may be subject to revert back in the future.
There are absolutely a shit ton of people whose attitudes towards and acceptance of these things have not changed at all in 20 years.
Anyways, I'm not planning on replying to any more comments on this topic at this point.
Eating factory farmed meat. With the way politics is headed there will be some politician at some point in the future trying desperately to defend his high beef consumption in what will become known as Burgergate.
Also, islamophobia in the context of defending religious nutjobs. For instance, it is islamophobic to complain about a muslim (Sikh, in reality) man at an airport because he "looks like a terrorist". It is not islamophobic to suggest that female students should be allowed in public schools just like male students. Both of these things have actually happened, very recently, and the latter was defended because people were scared shitless of being called islamophobic. We have to have some minimum human rights standards that religion cannot interfere with, and blatant sex-based discrimination is one of them. I do not give a flying fuck what your religion teaches you.
Now I second this. As a(n aspiring) comedian, I already feel like jokes about pronouns are only playable in rural shitty areas. Nowhere in the cities does that kind of "silly gay people" humor play. because humor is about punching up, and lgbt individuals are nowhere near being a full accepted part of the human experience. we won't have full acceptance of lgbt people in 20 years, but hey, pronoun jokes will definitely be reserved for shitty old people.
Thank you for not doing them even if you possibly could get away with it at some shows. Larry the Cable Guy is a millionaire but you know his grandchildren are going to be ashamed of him as they go to college using money made by telling jokes about trans people in bathrooms. It’s easy but it’s wrong and we all know it.
excessive alcohol consumption. I'm not saying I think there will be prohibition, but maybe it won't be so normal to get almost blackout drunk, or everyone drinking at parties to be the norm.
I think the increase in really good tasting non alcoholic beer and spirits is telling.
I quit drinking last September and it was the best thing for my mental and physical health I ever did. Lemmy.world/c/stopdrinking has so many people who quit drinking for reasons other than hitting rock bottom.
I would say also the rise of really good alcoholic drinks too. Less mindless drinking, less alcoholism. I agree with this answer, the trend is already started. But think people will always want to get high in some way, do not think total sobriety is likely.
It's one small thing to be thankful for. At the same time that I started losing my tolerance and drinking went from "yea!" to straight "blech", sober curious became more of a trend. Any decent bar/restaurant will have a (good!) mocktail or two, and non-alcoholic beer really has lagers and IPAs figured out.
And I don't feel like there's any social pressure or scrutiny over what I'm (not) drinking.
I think it depends more on what you're doing on those screens. I regularly download books from my local library to read on my phone. People used to read paper books, newspapers, and magazines all the time. Same shit, different means of consumption.
I don't think we know it's ruining our eyes, and screen usage probably doesn't affect circadian rhythms unless it's near bed time. But we do know sitting around all day increases your mortality quite a bit.
Over time, staring too long at screens can change the structure of the eyeball and lead to atrophy of the glands that keep it moist. Research is now pointing to excessive screen time for the rise in eye disorders, such as dry eye and myopia, which are becoming more common and affect more young people.
[...]
While myopia or nearsightedness has a genetic component, it has been shown to progress faster in people who overuse screens. Human eyes can also become chronically dry if the meibomian glands — a sebaceous gland that helps create protective tear film — become obstructed or atrophy. Meibomian glands secrete meibum, which is a specialized substance containing lipids that protects the eye surface.
It's different than the watery tears that flush the eye. Without a healthy tear film, eyes become dry, sensitive to light and irritated. Research has linked staring at digital devices for long periods without proper blinking to degraded gland function, even in some children.
Dystopic I know, but hear me out. I think this is already on the cusp of falling out of social norms as there are shows that let the American public gawk on the dynamics of very large families. Of course an "excessive" amount is vague and subjective but there is growing evidence on poorer outcomes for children who may have less nurturing and less family resources due to competition from having too many siblings. I myself come from a large family - so this is casual speculation from having witnessed the VERY different family dynamics from friends who came from single or two-child households.
Yeah, its funny reading newspapers and stuff from the time of the Influenza pandemic. Despite having happened 100 years ago, it was practically the exact same stuff that we experienced a few years ago.
I wish, but unfortunately am not very hopeful about this :(
Large parts of the world seem to be headed further in the direction of restricting self determination around your identity and your body. The worst part is seeing almost no-one fighting back. I live in the uk though, so some of that is related to the hellish media landscape here >.<
I'm not sure if OC would count this as meat or not, but lab grown meat is currently possible possible but not economically viable yet. Once that changes and cheap, ethical, eco friendly meat that's indistinguishable from conventional products is common, it will be much harder to justify conventional meat farming.
Baring that, plant based meat substitutes may gain a foothold, but we'll see.
As far as religion goes, that's actually a big unknown from my point of view. The "nones" have risen super fast, but a lot of churches have done a lot of aggressive things to try to slow that trend. I'm not sure if they'll eventually find something that works or if their efforts will further increase the secularization of the US. As far as the rest of the world, Europe in general makes me hopeful.
Magnets are very weird. Up until now, we don't really know what causes magnetism or how it works. We just know some rocks have it and others don't. Also, magents aren't super massively available in nature.
I'd hazzard a guess that guy refers to magnets the same way we SHOULD treat helium. It's a precious rare non renewable resource and we squander it like it's nothing.
No way you're getting rid of any kind of mysticism, ever. You have people shooting at random towers blaming 5g and not vaccinating because of the dumbest reasons.
Humankind as a whole isn't intelligent enough to get rid of irrational stupidity and as long as you have that you'll have people believing in all those things you mentioned.
Rare earth magnets are remarkably powerful, a couple hundred bucks gets you magnets with enough magnetic potential to crush bones. Children who swallow magnets are hospitalized, magnets be spooky
Bigotry is still active, just different groups. Racism is definitely still active, just different groups (look up stats on violence against Asians or their chances of getting into the Ivy Leagues). Human nature is so strong, I admire and doubt your optimism.
Sexism being actively obsolete in 20 years is possible and would be a good start.
Yes, I know they are still active, that's kind of the point I was making. I'm saying if things go as they look to be, then hopefully they won't be in 20 or so years. If they are just as active as they are now, or even more so, then hopefully asteroid 2044 takes care of the planet once and for all.
Gender Identity is not human nature, but rather the product of culture and language association. There have been plenty of cultures in recorded history with multiple - what we would call today - Gender Identities.
Language and its impact on perception of reality is a very interesting topic of study.
Oof. I really hope I'm not turning into that sack of used hemorrhoid cream. I'm fully aware of the progress, that's why watching the the rapid regression is so depressing. I actually hope I'm just wrong, but if I'm not, I'm quite sure trans people aren't to blame, so at least I got that going for me.
It's insane to me how the fuckcars movement went from "we should have walkable cities and more public transport" to "ban all cars".
The stupidity of not realizing that farmers, plumbers, electricians, etc. need cars to keep modern society working is baffling to me. Not to mention that they fully expect people to go grocery shopping every single day, or it never crosses their mind because they have no idea what it takes to feed a large family.
Yes, I agree on this with you, like cars are extremely inefficient way of transportation, especially considering how overcrowded our cities are and the general trend of making bigger and bigger cars that take even more space on the streets, on the parkings, etc.
Marriage is a stupid idea. Men and women have virtually nothing in common and make terrible partners. Men's lack of emotional sensitivity makes them incapable of providing a fulfilling relationship. Women don't have anything like the sex drive of men. At some point women turn off the sex tap, as is their perogative but society simultaneously frowns upon extra martial affairs. Cue brooding resentment. Scientists should hurry up and invent babies in a can or sex robots and solve the pressing problems of male-female relationships. Judeo-Christian values can eat my refuse.
I would gladly answer your question, and I know Im going to get downvoted because I won't exactly answer it. So understandable if you downvote me for not providing an answer, all I want is to apologize coz I like actually providing productive answers.
I just want to apologize that Im not willing to invest time into re-iterating my thinking into "why I think signal is not 'fun' to use". I dont wanna invest my time into re-installing Signal, writing a list and an essay about it etc and then going back and forth with you.
It would require much effort from my time to do that and in detail and we would go back and forth, so I'm just here to apologize for not responding to your question because it's a great question. I always like to give detailed answers but just not willing to invest my time into this discussion for which Im sorry. I hope you get an answer from somebody else if someone else shares the same opinion.
For context, and why I'm judging Signal harshly, I'm a software engineer at Powerfactors, and used to be a Frontend developer, now I'm professionally a Backend engineer. And I've started as a Fullstack and Freelancer. So I kind of understand both sides and trying to understand the user as well. Like I try to understand users like my Grandmother, my mother, to a programmer or a graphic designer. I try to understand who the software is for, and how to make it appealing to them and useful.
I make my own Project which I re-iterated many times throughout the years to make user friendly and "fun" or easy to use or actually useful for clients to use. So when I use a piece of software I think in detail what could be done better and what could have gone bad from both frontend, backend, and UX/UI and I like the OSX/Apple philosophy on this one. That's as much as you're gonna get from me, Im NOT going to re-install Signal again and write a piece of list and essay coz I know this is gonna take much of my time, it's who I am, I like writing detailed essays and answers + (i accidentally deleted my last answer instead of clicking edit i clicked delete).
edit: Again, I wanna emphasize, your question is awesome, if somebody here is UX/UI specialist, or knows about user-experience in general for some reason, and has the time to invest, you have my blessing. I'm making the comparison between Telegram, WhatsApp etc. vs Signal for context and why my opinion is that Signal falls besides them. + As you can see I'm not "arguing in bad faith". Im here to discuss.:)