>From: "john grigg" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>In 2050, there will still be "haves" and "have-nots" but the definitions
>will have changed. This has been talked about on the list before,
>certainly. A 2050 "have-not" may have a lifestyle that only a
>multi-millioniare has now, and yet will feel frustrated by living when
>looking at the "haves" who can afford certain services and luxuries that
>I am curious to know what the list members think will be the real
>differences between the "haves and the have-nots" a half-century from now?
Well if our extropian hopes and dreams come to pass and access to strong AI
and self-rep nano is widely available by then, the only real poverty will be
self-imposed by ascetics and religious, technophobe and/or conscientious
vow-of-poverty or rugged outdoor/adventure types.
As for the rest of us, being a "have-not" will consist primarily (if not
exclusively) of being deprived of those few things which cannot be
manufactured by a nano-enabled near anything box. Such as prime Earth real
estate and human-provided services. While everyone will be able to get
robotic massage and AI psychotherapy, only the truly rich will be able to
afford to have these services performed by real live, well-trained humans.
We will all probably be able to live in finely appointed high-rise
condominiums (perhaps out in the oceans), but you will still have to be a
big time mover and shaker to have a villa in the south of France.
Or at least that's what I think.
"I like dreams of the future better than the history of the past"
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:09:15 MDT