Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Do we underestimate what's coming?

230 replies

Dappy777 · 03/06/2025 16:33

I have become quite interested in AI lately and have been watching loads of Youtube lectures. Some of it is really mind-blowing. What struck me most was a talk given by Stephen Fry in which he said humans are like children playing on a beach and squabbling over the sand and pebbles. Meanwhile, just over the horizon, waves are gathering to form one giant tsunami that is going to knock us flying. His point was that it isn't just AI. Numerous waves of technology – nanotechnology, gene editing, virtual reality, genetic engineering, quantum computing, etc – are uniting. Any one of them on its own could transform the world. But they are going to combine, and in some cases speed each other along (AI could speed up nanotech, for example).

One AI expert thinks we could see all illness and disease brought under medical control within ten years. Even Jeffrey Hinton, who won the nobel prize, thinks AI will wipe out all illness and disease within 20 years. Human ageing may be halted and even reversed!! Another expert thinks that, thanks to regenerative medicine, by the late 2030s 50-somethings will look like 20-somethings. Stephen Fry himself thinks the first person to live beyond 200 has already been born.

Yet we carry on as if the future will be more or less like the present. Is it sensible for a 25-year-old to marry and have a child when we're on the brink of regenerative medicine that could extend her life for centuries (assuming climate change and nuclear weapons and bio-terrorists and hackers and so on don't wreck everything)? My friend's daughter is due to start secondary school in September. They are already wondering what GCSEs she'll enjoy, what A-Levels she might take and what career she'll choose. They are carrying on as if her life will be just like theirs was. But if she goes to university, that will be 2032. By the time she completes her degree it will be 2035. By 2035 AI, nanotechnology, gene editing, VR, quantum computing and god knows what else (not to mention climate change) will have made the world a very different place. There might not be any jobs. Should we be educating children in a completely different way? Do they need to study traditional subjects at all!?? Should we overhaul education and focus on things like empathy, relationships, life skills, meaning and purpose?

The problem, I think, is that ordinary divs like me have zero understanding. For all I know these experts could be exaggerating. Because I'm so bad at science, they could tell me the moon is made of cheese and I'd believe them. The one thing they all agree on, however, is that the pace of change is accelerating. One of them said we'll live through 100 years of scientific progress in the next ten years. Shouldn't we be constantly talking about all this?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
7
LogicalBlodge · 08/06/2025 21:16

smallglassbottle · 04/06/2025 12:54

There is no way the rich will ever agree to giving people money for nothing. They'd rather see us starve than that. Money is their god and ordinary people should suffer through working if they want it, is their belief. They believe they've worked hard for it and only they deserve it. They'd rather see us dead or in workhouses than issue a ubi.

The rich are cruel and greedy.

The government makes the decision. Remember its still one man one vote. One man can be very rich but they still only get one vote.

LogicalBlodge · 08/06/2025 21:21

JasmineAllen · 05/06/2025 14:38

I'm sorry but that appear to be rubbish especially regarding something like autoimmune disease.

I don't think this is untrue. There's a government database registry of diseases and with AI the hundreds of thousands of GP records that can be accessed on it can be analysed. You can of course opt out of the registry.

LogicalBlodge · 08/06/2025 21:24

sparrowflewdown · 05/06/2025 15:18

You might want to look into the Fermi Paradox—the idea that, although the universe contains billions of potentially habitable planets, we have yet to detect signs of intelligent extraterrestrial life. One proposed explanation is that many civilizations may have emerged and advanced technologically, but ultimately destroyed themselves before reaching a stage where interstellar communication or travel was possible. This self-destruction could be linked to what is known as the technological singularity—a point at which a civilization's technological progress accelerates uncontrollably, potentially leading to catastrophic consequences.

Kind of like groundhog day at universe scale.

JasmineAllen · 08/06/2025 23:00

LogicalBlodge · 08/06/2025 21:21

I don't think this is untrue. There's a government database registry of diseases and with AI the hundreds of thousands of GP records that can be accessed on it can be analysed. You can of course opt out of the registry.

I'm not saying AI can't be useful in diagnosis. I'm saying AI curing all disease (like autoimmune disease which has a genetic predisposition) isn't possible.
If you are genetically predisposed to something there is only so much you can do to avoid developing it AI or no AI.

DucklingSwimmingInstructress · 09/06/2025 15:04

LogicalBlodge · 08/06/2025 21:16

The government makes the decision. Remember its still one man one vote. One man can be very rich but they still only get one vote.

The rich men control the social media and newspapers that have an enormous influence on the way that the society as a whole votes. 1 person 1 vote is not the reality of the way voting works now. Murdoch, Brexit, Facebook, Twitter, the rest of it.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread