Pages:
Author

Topic: How will look the world in 2100? - page 2. (Read 674 times)

sr. member
Activity: 1204
Merit: 270
Hire Bitcointalk Camp. Manager @ r7promotions.com
July 20, 2020, 09:51:49 PM
#35
People live in hope This year the virus has caused a lot of damage in the world By 2021, people will have to go through many difficult challenges There is a danger of running out of oil gas and drinking water With natural disasters. But hopefully people will get an improved vaccine at this time People can have unexpected success in dealing with the disease The average life expectancy of a person can increase to around 60 years The infant mortality rate will be greatly reduced.

Artificial intelligence technology will be in the hands of people by 2021. Researchers believe that the development of artificial intelligence will be able to completely change the nature of human civilization.
legendary
Activity: 1848
Merit: 1982
Fully Regulated Crypto Casino
July 20, 2020, 08:47:17 PM
#34
Nice study, but I think it is largely theoretical and unrealistic, because there are a lot of unexpected things that can happen and change everything, for example the Corona virus that is circulating in the world now no one expected to happen and has led to major human and economic changes .
Another issue that has not been taken into consideration is wars and forced migration that occur due to wars, as happened in Syria, for example, and which led to a large mass migration to Europe and the world.
One last thing, though, is that no one can predict it, but it can happen and can change everything, which is the emergence of a third world war, which many people warn of and if it happens it will lead to major changes in the economy, climate, population and even politics.
full member
Activity: 1162
Merit: 168
July 20, 2020, 01:48:21 PM
#33
We can only make presumption on things that are going to happen in the future based on what we are experiencing now.
But, the truth still remains that we can’t predict the future, though it’s good that we don’t neglect the things that are happening around us now, because in some ways the data we have can help us make the right decisions.

It’s just like this pandemic, if last year or two years anyone was told that there is going to be a pandemic that will come out and start killing people, nobody would have believed that. Well, here we are and that’s what’s happening today.

Some people are saying the highly populated nations will build their economy stronger whereas some others are speculating possible collapse just because dense population. China is world second largest country in area hence they are good with largest population whereas India is world only 8th largest country in area and when it becomes highly populated then its economy may not grow like China.
sr. member
Activity: 1288
Merit: 305
yes
July 20, 2020, 09:30:00 AM
#32
Before 2100 we must have had many changes in our economy and blockchain technology will be adopted in all faces of life. I seeing this technology ruling many generations as the world may not have best technology than it. It is most secure, reliable ways of safe, transmit and using information.

There are other emerging technologies which are leveraging on blockchain and hoping to be at the top level with blockchain, electrical cars and other safer technology to reduce the impact of social pollution and help boost the human immune system and expand lifespan further. If human beings live more and age more; the adoption of blockchain is a sure way of expanding its growth across all sectors of the human economy.


In the case of biodiversity and conservation ecosystem would be safer for the organisms that produce needed nutrients for food production and starvation would defeated to a minimal extent. My predictions, actually.
full member
Activity: 1232
Merit: 186
July 20, 2020, 08:38:34 AM
#31
However, in the future, most hard work will be done by robots (which we can see today)[...]

Actually, this is one of the scarier possibilities to me. You can think of job automation as a way of fixing labor shortages. Another way to think of them: there will be fewer and fewer jobs for humans. [...]

That's really what I hate in a concept where robots will dominate our purposes here in this world. In 2100, if we engaged in super futuristic technologies, probably humans will have a hard time to live for themselves. [...]
Don't get me wrong guys, I also think that AI domination would be possible but happening only for the next 80 years? Hmmm, I highly doubt. I still do believe that our world will run mainly by manpower at least in the near future. I don't know if I'm the only one feeling this but I think the pace of technological changes are not so fast. How ironic that smartphone and other gadgets are updating its specs every couple of months but problems on public transportation on many countries seems never ending (like here). That is just only one of the examples we can think of. IMHO what's happening is that men are really crazy on improving the leisure part of living but slow on fulfilling the basic needs. Unlike Japan which is now living in the year 2030 lmao Grin (just kidding).

My own insight regarding this topic is this.. The rich becomes richer and the poor becomes poorer. Money is power. If you don't have it, you lose Undecided.
legendary
Activity: 2254
Merit: 2253
From Zero to 2 times Self-Made Legendary
July 20, 2020, 04:42:07 AM
#30
Actually, this is one of the scarier possibilities to me. You can think of job automation as a way of fixing labor shortages. Another way to think of them: there will be fewer and fewer jobs for humans. Without a major expansion UBI or similar welfare programs, and/or some kind of transition to socialization or cooperative ownership of private property, this could be catastrophic for the world's poor.
It could be said that labor-intensive industries are no longer relevant in the industrial revolution 4.0. unfortunately, many countries are too late to anticipate this transition. In the future, repetitive jobs are easily replaced by robots and affected by automation. So the nature of technology 4.0 is a disruptive technology.

Only a few countries have technology-based basic education. To face competition with robots, education is needed that focuses on developing emotional intelligence, not only sharpening intelligence quotient. We will lose if competing IQ with robots. Jobs and memorizing knowledge can be replaced by AI. Human skills that are not easily replaced by empathy, creativity, and analytical expertise on complex problems. We must be able to educate humans who are not only memorizing, doing manual work but who are able to do analytical work, creativity, a complex problem solving, this can be done by humans through brain and heart interaction.


Quote
In a capitalist economy, how are humans supposed to sustain themselves when there aren't enough jobs to go around?
In the world of capitalism, if you want to survive, job seekers and opportunity seekers must be able to read what the market wants. The closest to the job provider criteria, which will survive.
legendary
Activity: 3234
Merit: 5637
Blackjack.fun-Free Raffle-Join&Win $50🎲
July 20, 2020, 04:12:48 AM
#29
However, in the future, most hard work will be done by robots (which we can see today), so perhaps the consequences for the economy in terms of labor shortages will not be as pronounced as today.

Actually, this is one of the scarier possibilities to me. You can think of job automation as a way of fixing labor shortages. Another way to think of them: there will be fewer and fewer jobs for humans. Without a major expansion UBI or similar welfare programs, and/or some kind of transition to socialization or cooperative ownership of private property, this could be catastrophic for the world's poor.

In a capitalist economy, how are humans supposed to sustain themselves when there aren't enough jobs to go around?

This process has already begun, and unfortunately for people it will not stop because making a profit is always in the first place. Take Hungary for example, their economy grew by about 5% last year and their industry lost 23 000 jobs. Predictions say that due to the robotization of production, the country will lose about 200 000 jobs in the next 10 years.

I know of many examples where production systems in factories are 90% automated, and owners are thrilled because robots are very profitable in the long run, do not go on vacation, sick leave or seek an increase in their labor rights. I think that the automation of production facilities will greatly affect not only the poor, but also the entire pension system, which is already in crisis if we see that people are being forced to work longer - that is, trying to implement policies from work to the cemetery.

https://learningenglish.voanews.com/a/robots-replace-human-workers-in-eastern-europe/5328102.html
legendary
Activity: 1806
Merit: 1521
July 20, 2020, 03:40:34 AM
#28
You can think of job automation as a way of fixing labor shortages. Another way to think of them: there will be fewer and fewer jobs for humans. Without a major expansion UBI or similar welfare programs, and/or some kind of transition to socialization or cooperative ownership of private property, this could be catastrophic for the world's poor.

In a capitalist economy, how are humans supposed to sustain themselves when there aren't enough jobs to go around?

That's really what I hate in a concept where robots will dominate our purposes here in this world. In 2100, if we engaged in super futuristic technologies, probably humans will have a hard time to live for themselves. We are lucky enough to live in this year 2020 even though there's a pandemic that we are experiencing, at least, we can still work for ourselves. Imagine those people who would live in year 2100, that's a huge struggle for them.

Under the current economic paradigm, yes.

The rationale for capitalism as an acceptable system hinges on it sustaining the working population. If it can't even do that, political momentum will build behind something else. If you don't feed the people, they will riot.

The peaceful route is a system like UBI, where a stipend would provide for basic necessities, funded for by corporate taxes. The other route is a revolution of sorts.
full member
Activity: 980
Merit: 114
July 20, 2020, 02:01:53 AM
#27
Before 2100 we must have had many changes in our economy and blockchain technology will be adopted in all faces of life. I seeing this technology ruling many generations as the world may not have best technology than it. It is most secure, reliable ways of safe, transmit and using information.
full member
Activity: 1540
Merit: 219
July 19, 2020, 11:59:44 PM
#26
However, in the future, most hard work will be done by robots (which we can see today), so perhaps the consequences for the economy in terms of labor shortages will not be as pronounced as today.

Actually, this is one of the scarier possibilities to me. You can think of job automation as a way of fixing labor shortages. Another way to think of them: there will be fewer and fewer jobs for humans. Without a major expansion UBI or similar welfare programs, and/or some kind of transition to socialization or cooperative ownership of private property, this could be catastrophic for the world's poor.

In a capitalist economy, how are humans supposed to sustain themselves when there aren't enough jobs to go around?

That's really what I hate in a concept where robots will dominate our purposes here in this world. In 2100, if we engaged in super futuristic technologies, probably humans will have a hard time to live for themselves. We are lucky enough to live in this year 2020 even though there's a pandemic that we are experiencing, at least, we can still work for ourselves. Imagine those people who would live in year 2100, that's a huge struggle for them. AI takeover can soon happen once we don't give importance to a human labor in that year. There are a lot of possibilities so that we should become more mindful about our inventions. We should focus on a human importance so that people will not have a hard time working for their own survival.
hero member
Activity: 3178
Merit: 977
www.Crypto.Games: Multiple coins, multiple games
July 19, 2020, 04:30:50 PM
#25
No one knows. This is the simple answer. Honestly, no one can predict how the world will look like tomorrow which is why these predictions and statistics are pointless based on a wide array of assumptions and observations.

Our planet could get get screwed completely thanks to meteors or global warming or multiple pandemics etc which is why thinking about 2100 is out of the question.

The present matters the most if you ask me. The past and future do matter a lot obviously, but the present should be our primary focus. The proper question should be 'How is the world today?'.
legendary
Activity: 1806
Merit: 1521
July 19, 2020, 04:21:22 PM
#24
However, in the future, most hard work will be done by robots (which we can see today), so perhaps the consequences for the economy in terms of labor shortages will not be as pronounced as today.

Actually, this is one of the scarier possibilities to me. You can think of job automation as a way of fixing labor shortages. Another way to think of them: there will be fewer and fewer jobs for humans. Without a major expansion UBI or similar welfare programs, and/or some kind of transition to socialization or cooperative ownership of private property, this could be catastrophic for the world's poor.

In a capitalist economy, how are humans supposed to sustain themselves when there aren't enough jobs to go around?
hero member
Activity: 1330
Merit: 569
July 19, 2020, 03:11:54 PM
#23
With all of these projections flying here and there, if there is anything Coronavirus have taught us is that plans and projections can be derailed and there is nothing anyone can do about it. Whoever thoughts that 2020 would be like this no one saw it coming but here we are. For me 2100 is still a long way to go and who knows maybe we would have moved to the moon or maybe the population of the world would have reduced drastically with several issues we are still battling with. There is still trade war going on, threat of nuclear power from countries, climate change is another factor.

Those that would be here in 2100 should take care of their projections. It's not as if government would start planning towards that.
legendary
Activity: 3052
Merit: 1188
July 19, 2020, 12:26:03 PM
#22
You do realize that governmental affects and boundaries do happen and that is why some stuff slow down right? I mean India is not a super rich country, sure there are worse countries in the world but it can't survive on 1.5 billion for too long, most of the time when nations reach that point they start to go down.

Look at china for example and their child situation, that is why they are going down and will probably go down even faster with that rule, maybe India will put that too? Or Nigeria going up that much thanks to better economical situation but at around 733 million? That is not going to be reached at all. All of these numbers are probably calculated on "if everything continues like this, this will be the result" but I do not think everything will continue like that.
legendary
Activity: 1974
Merit: 1150
July 19, 2020, 10:57:28 AM
#21
Planet Earth, at least in terms of resource consumption, is already very dangerously endangered today because we spend much more in one year than the earth can realistically produce in order to maintain balance.
Will this be a reason for world government to minimize future threats? The biggest threat to planet Earth is extinction and thats for sure.

The problem here is not in the overpopulation, but in the unequal distribution of resources in the form of food, technology and wealth in general. If 10% of the population controls 90% of resources and wealth, then they are a problem that not only destroys people as a species, but also their environment. Unfortunately, humans are the only species of living beings that consciously destroy the place where they live, perhaps because some rich people think that one day they will live on Mars anyway.
Its scary but human are the most blamed species and must be responsible for what happen on earth. About mars, I dont think it would be the right place for the human species if the earth was doomed and I didnt even know where the right place was for the human species at that time.
sr. member
Activity: 1288
Merit: 305
yes
July 19, 2020, 09:27:29 AM
#20
I'm not a bit surprised with the projection of Nigeria's population as it is predicted to become the second most populous nation in the world in the next 80 years after India. 2021 is still a very long walk to do, Nigeria is faced with a lot of economic crises, insecurities and many other social vices killing people and rendering the projection almost impossible. A lot can still be fixed withing this time frame and we hope it becomes a fiscal reality.

Regardless Nigerians have high libidos and they are very fertile  when it comes to childbirth; very hardworking people and are working relentlessly everyday to put food on the tables of the children they birth.
legendary
Activity: 3234
Merit: 5637
Blackjack.fun-Free Raffle-Join&Win $50🎲
July 19, 2020, 09:07:31 AM
#19
I thought that the statistics above is for booming of economy but when I read the paragraph, I saw that it projected the most populous countries in the world by 2100. I am not really familiar with demography but I think that earth would be less populated in 2100. Why?

Nowadays, every country is economically strong in the extent to which it invests in its people, ie in their education and in creating an entrepreneurial climate in which these people realize their ideas. Countries facing the challenge of losing population in a way lose not only the ability to have a strong economy, but also to become vulnerable in defending their borders and preserving their identity.

However, in the future, most hard work will be done by robots (which we can see today), so perhaps the consequences for the economy in terms of labor shortages will not be as pronounced as today.

The theory of population by Thomas Malthus have been discussed in his Essay on the principle of population, that the population growth potentially exponential while the growth of resources is additional. It means that overpopulation will drain the resources of earth and if it continuously consumes by the people, earth may disrupt.

Planet Earth, at least in terms of resource consumption, is already very dangerously endangered today because we spend much more in one year than the earth can realistically produce in order to maintain balance. The problem here is not in the overpopulation, but in the unequal distribution of resources in the form of food, technology and wealth in general. If 10% of the population controls 90% of resources and wealth, then they are a problem that not only destroys people as a species, but also their environment. Unfortunately, humans are the only species of living beings that consciously destroy the place where they live, perhaps because some rich people think that one day they will live on Mars anyway.
legendary
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1159
July 19, 2020, 06:56:51 AM
#18
Somehow, as people find more and more avenues for self-indulgence, they want to have lesser children.

It's not as easy as saying that women don't want children because they are lazy and prefer to spend money on pretty things instead of changing diapers.
The problem in developed countries is that everything is expensive and forces people to spend a large portion of their income on bills. If you compare a country like Nigeria, where people dig a hole in the ground behind the house and burn their garbage in it, don't have to buy winter clothes or heat the house, often barbecue or cook in wood fired ovens, to a typical western city, where you have to pay for everything, even for parking your car. The western society is based on taxes and fees on every step and it forces both parents to work, which is why most couples choose to have a single child.

My comment about people having avenues for self-indulgence isn't gender specific actually. What i meant is that men and women today have a lot else to do than follow a set pattern of getting married and settling down with a bunch of kids. Many people want to forego marriage entirely and maybe "explore" the world, follow their passion and what not. This is a typical sentiment for a lot of people in the recent middle class, living in metros in developing countries at least. Ditto for women not wanting to tie down careers multiple times for the pregnancy and early-rearing period. All these things are much more simplified in the bigger households of poorer countries.
hero member
Activity: 2114
Merit: 603
July 19, 2020, 01:39:46 AM
#17
Interesting talk.

I think there is one more branch that could come out in this discussion. The rise of A.I., decreased reproduction rate, increased immortality rates etc. Yes the last one is not misspelled. With the current increased advancements in the IT sector and mechanical industries we may have robotic surgeons, cancer healing power and sense of healthy life.

We talking about 80 years from now! When we had engines running on steam and thought of the future we made them run on electric current and beyond.

In similar way just imagine the growth of these sectors from 80 years onwards!

It could happen all above theories might just become obsolete, people may stop reproducing due to increased life span. Or may have sense of having single child for inheritance and stuff.

The whole world might just unite together with one united leadership and protocols to live life happily. So this may happen population may not grow but decline drastically, climate will flourish to it's old age era, breathable, pure oxygen, purest water. All leading to sustained life time.

So no predictions, which country will cross which in terms of population.
legendary
Activity: 2814
Merit: 1192
July 18, 2020, 10:03:50 AM
#16
Somehow, as people find more and more avenues for self-indulgence, they want to have lesser children.

It's not as easy as saying that women don't want children because they are lazy and prefer to spend money on pretty things instead of changing diapers.
The problem in developed countries is that everything is expensive and forces people to spend a large portion of their income on bills. If you compare a country like Nigeria, where people dig a hole in the ground behind the house and burn their garbage in it, don't have to buy winter clothes or heat the house, often barbecue or cook in wood fired ovens, to a typical western city, where you have to pay for everything, even for parking your car. The western society is based on taxes and fees on every step and it forces both parents to work, which is why most couples choose to have a single child.
Pages:
Jump to: