Exposing children to social media.
Putting your kids on social media publicly.
The kids that grew up with it will probably see the harm caused and not want to pass that on.
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.
Hopefully for profit health care, but I’m not holding my breath.
Definitely don’t hold your breath.
If you pass out and hit your head, do you know how much that would cost to go to urgent care?
Stealing water from neighboring clans. Driving cars without spikes.
Hopefully tipping.
Not being 100% available 24/7/365 will become even less acceptable than its already become.
Meat eating is a possibility. I don’t see it being universal, but veganism is on the ride and it makes sense to a lot of people.
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.
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.
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.
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.
SUVs.
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.
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.
Fair point! I still disagree insofar as I doubt it will happen in 20 years, but that seems less absurd to believe when you put it that way
May not be widely accepted, but it is accepted in a good chunk of the world.
- Being a Bigot
- Being Racist
- Being Sexist
Yeah, I don’t see any of those things changing. I’ve read too many history books and they’re traits of our species, not minor blips.
Well, if they don’t then the world can burn, and I hope it does if not.
They won’t.
The traits you describe are as old as the human race itself, and even with the vast knowledge we now possess, they’re still endemic to the human experience. They’re built into our DNA.
Then the world deserves to burn.
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.
Driving ICE cars.
Driving
ICEcars.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.
Nope.
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.
It’s insane to me how the fuckcars movement went from “we should have walkable cities and more public transport” to “ban all cars”.
have you read the sidebar of the fuckcars communities?
From Wiki (emphasis mine):
The car-free movement is a broad, informal, emergent network of individuals and organizations, including social activists, urban planners, transportation engineers, environmentalists and others, brought together by a shared belief that large and/or high-speed motorized vehicles (cars, trucks, tractor units, motorcycles, etc.)[1] are too dominant in most modern cities. The goal of the movement is to create places where motorized vehicle use is greatly reduced or eliminated, by converting road and parking space to other public uses and rebuilding compact urban environments where most destinations are within easy reach by other means, including walking, cycling, public transport, personal transporters, and mobility as a service.
From Reddit (emphasis mine):
Discussion about the harmful effects of car dominance on communities, environment, safety, and public health. Aspiration towards more sustainable and effective alternatives like mass transit and improved pedestrian and cycling infrastructure.
From lemmy (emphasis mine):
An place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let’s explore the bad world of Cars!
Equating the fuckcars movement to “ban all cars” is like equating climate change to “ban all oil”.
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.
My aunt feeds a family of five. She does not own a car, nor does she do grocery shopping every day. You know what’s the answer? You had it right - “we should have walkable cities and more public transport”.
have you read the sidebar of the fuckcars communities?
Yes, and I’ve also seen the posts and comments. Which is more representative of the actual community.
I see posts and comments talking about how rail isn’t better, bike lanes aren’t more widespread, how too many parking lots is an issue… I don’t see anyone saying cars should be banned outright.
Should have added a winky face. We can’t ban cars, but definitely need to use cars less. Mostly a joke about how the current state of EVs is just green washing.
That’s fair.
I was mostly venting my frustration over those silly posts anway. Since as long as humans have physical bodies, we will at times need individual transportation. And they sometimes act like literally everything in life can be done through public transport and excpeting people to bring home a couch on the bus.
These people live in a tiny little bubble, but the glass is dirty and they can’t see outside. They probably have zero idea where their food comes from and how far it had to travel to make it to their wholefoods, or how different the lives of the people that grow it are to their own.
In 10 years
- Selling high strength magnets without regulation
- Petroleum cars
In 100 years?
- Eating meat
- Natural gas stoves
- Oil/Natural gas furnaces
- Anonymous online communities
- Not wearing a sort of body-camera in most professions
In 1000 years?
- Religion, mysticism, paranormal beliefs
- An inversion of religious moralism, I think things that are thought of as evil will have to become the norm, genetic modification, cloning, etc.
- Eating food in general
In 100 years?
Eating meat Natural gas stoves Oil/Natural gas furnacesThis sounds like a solid +6°C plan if it takes 100 years
It’s all a devious plan by the canadians so they can have warmer beaches
Why does religion get another 1000 years, but meat is gone in 100? 😩
Also: what’s that about magnets? Why would we outlaw/regulate high powered magnets?
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.
…we can literally just manufacturer super powerful magnets. What the hell are you talking about?
No you can’t. At least not what they are talking about. Rare Earth Megnets have Rare in the name for a reason.
Mate, you’re talking out your ass. Neodynium is a rare metal, yes. But we’re not going through neodymium deposits fishing out magnets like they’re some sort of gemstone.
That shit gets mined, melted, alloyed with other minerals, smelted into shape then run through magnetic field generators to induce a magnetic charge in them, as just a very rough overall view of the process.
The biggest issue is that making them is INCREDIBLY material inefficient. Making one really good quality magnet requires an absolute fucking shit ton of processing, all of which reduces yield and increases waste product generation every step of the way.
Just spitballing, but potentially:
- undeclared AI usage for photos, video, code, etc
- driving old beater cars or even nicer old ones like corvettes
- Being outside during the peak of the day’s heat
Hopefully, marriage.
Do you have blue hair by any chance?
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.
This post was brought to you by: Lots o’ Issues.
Publicly releasing a crime suspect’s name before conviction. Can’t believe that’s legal, may as well call them guilty until proven innocent.
I read somewhere that doing that makes it harder for the police to just “disappear” you
Gender assumptions
You think human nature is going to change in 20 years?
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.
That’s not what I meant. Our brains are programmed to make as complete an image of a person as possible when first meeting them, including all attributes that can be inferred from their exterior.
Oh, easily fixed: If you aren’t able to tell if someone identifies as Masculine or Feminine; there’s a solid chance that they’re Non-Binary. If you aren’t sure though, its always safe to refer to and think of someone as “They/Them” and Non-conforming to traditional gender roles.
I can’t do that, actually, since there are no gender-neutral pronouns in German. Btw, traditional gender roles are nonsense, anyways.
Oh interesting! I was unaware that German didn’t contain gender neutral pronouns. Is German a gender heavy language similar to Spanish?
Couldn’t say since I don’t speak Spanish, but in German, every article is gendered. Though unlike English we have a third gender, neutrum.
