NationStates Jolt Archive

What kind of sci-fi future really connects with you, deeply? I list three with increasing depressive-ness.

1. Star Trek TNG (Happy-ish)

Humans have a united world government. Everyone treats each other courteously, on the whole. Machines are clean and grease-free. When people die they just fly off intact with sooty phaser wounds. Aliens share human virtues and can be your bosom buddies. A robot can be a highly respected member of the crew. Aliens can also be sulky, but usually negotiable.

2. Star Wars IV-V-VI (Despotic)

Humans have a failed galactic republic. Everyone treats each other with suspicion, often with contempt. Machines are greasy and need an occasional jolt to work. When people die they can be burnt to a crisp skeleton or sliced into two. Aliens share human failings, robots are your best friend. Aliens can also be sulky, manipulative, evil, violent and barely negotiable.

3. Aliens series (Downright depressing)

Humans are governed by evil corporations that are a terrible excuse for "government". Everyone treats each other like a meat byproduct. Machines are dank, creaky and unreliable most of the time. When people die they spill their guts in the most nightmarish manner possible. Aliens are completely inhumane at all levels, robots cannot be trusted. Aliens are not negotiable. Period.

Am I the first poster to see this spectrum? Anyway, VOTE!

What kind of sci-fi future really connects with you, deeply? I list three with increasing depressive-ness.

1. Star Trek TNG (Happy-ish)

Humans have a united world government. Everyone treats each other courteously, on the whole. Machines are clean and grease-free. When people die they just fly off intact with sooty phaser wounds. Aliens share human virtues and can be your bosom buddies. A robot can be a highly respected member of the crew. Aliens can also be sulky, but usually negotiable.

2. Star Wars IV-V-VI (Despotic)

Humans have a failed galactic republic. Everyone treats each other with suspicion, often with contempt. Machines are greasy and need an occasional jolt to work. When people die they can be burnt to a crisp skeleton or sliced into two. Aliens share human failings, robots are your best friend. Aliens can also be sulky, manipulative, evil, violent and barely negotiable.

3. Aliens series (Downright depressing)

Humans are governed by evil corporations that are a terrible excuse for "government". Everyone treats each other like a meat byproduct. Machines are dank, creaky and unreliable most of the time. When people die they spill their guts in the most nightmarish manner possible. Aliens are completely inhumane at all levels, robots cannot be trusted. Aliens are not negotiable. Period.

Am I the first poster to see this spectrum? Anyway, VOTE!

Looking at the way the world is going? One of the later 2.

You forgot #4, the Matrix.

Humans are farmed by evil AIs as a power source, the sky is black and lightless, the land is ruined, and the virtual reality they've stuffed us into to keep us happy is actually nicer than the real world.

Matrix all the way. Surrender to the Robot overlords now, and they may not turn you into batteries...

Warhammer 40k.

Captures human nature quite well, I think.

SIR, a mixture of Aliens and Star Wars, with a dash of Starship Troopers, SIR!

:fluffle:

Matrix all the way. Surrender to the Robot overlords now, and they may not turn you into batteries...

No no no! Surrender to the Robot overlords now, so they will turn you into batteries first! Before all the porn star slots are taken!

I can definitely see us heading for a Starship Troopers future.

you forgot the outer limits "to serve man" vision, is/was a COOKBOOK
:sniper: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :D :D :D

I'm hoping for one like Fallout.

/me starts saving bottlecaps.

you forgot the outer limits "to serve man" vision, is/was a COOKBOOK
Mmmm... Soylent Green :fluffle:

I'm hoping for one like Fallout.

/me starts saving bottlecaps.

Winner! :)

Why has no-one mentioned Babylon 5? WHY?

Why has no-one mentioned Babylon 5? WHY?
Because of the enigmatic Vorlons don't want them to?

(And the shadows are comming! :eek: )

Or the Hitchhikers guide version

1. Star Trek TNG (Happy-ish)

Impossible.

2. Star Wars IV-V-VI (Despotic)

Likely, but probably in Europe and mostly in the East.

3. Aliens series (Downright depressing)

This is the most likely, especially for America. For all intents and purposes, it's not that far off!

Mad Max seems to be THE most likely scenario, though.

You forgot #4, the Matrix.

Humans are farmed by evil AIs as a power source, the sky is black and lightless, the land is ruined, and the virtual reality they've stuffed us into to keep us happy is actually nicer than the real world.

How do you edit a poll? And where would you put the Matrix series in the spectrum - more or less depressing than Aliens?

i was going to vote for star trek. but then i noticed the last option and it made me giggle. but, don't worry xisla, i don't really hate you i just thought the option was fucking hilarious :D

I can definitely see us heading for a Starship Troopers future.

Starship Troopers (Depressing? Or bloody entertaining shit?)

Humans are governed by a fascist militaristic world government. Everyone looks Aryan, are encouraged to grab boobs in the park and serve in the Federal Service. Which is both nice and vicious, at different levels. Machines look sleek on the outside but shudder a lot inside, and they use machine guns and 90's CRT monitors. When people die they spill way more guts than can possibly fit into their bodies in the first place. They also contain liquidy brains that are easy to suck in one big slurp. Aliens are arachnid warriors that are not negotiable, 'cept if you shoot their nerve stem. Then they go down quick, but you still have another 30,000 more to go.

I voted for 2, because it's middle of the road... But I do think the Starship Troopers scenario is believeable.

The biggest reason I can't imagine a Star Trek future, is maybe because I don't want to. The Federation has a sort of quiet arrogance about it that makes me sick. One of the reasons I like Babylon 5 and Battlestar Galactica (new) is because even the good guys are flawed and sometimes even stupid. Just like real life. Earth Alliance and the Colonial Fleet have no illusions about their flaws. They know how screwed up they can be. Somehow, the Federation just seems to patronize everybody. Ew.

I think Starship Troopers represents a more likely futire scenario because frankly, I see the world trying to move in that direction, and a Worldwide Government is going to be totalitarian in nature. It has to be. You can't unite people of radically different cultures under a single form of government by choice. Just look at Iraq. 3 different flavors of Arab/Islamic culture and still you have issues where they're sometimes at each others' throats. If the US weren't there holding it together by force, it would degenerate into chaos in a hurry.

So yeah.

I was hoping for an "I, Robot" commercial, sleek and nice future and then I looked around. Well, it was a fun idea...

Halflife 2 seems about right. Just remove the aliens.

I'll be from Aurora in the Asimov universe.
Gotta lovethe casual sex all the time.

The Dune future wouldn't be so bad I guess...

What kind of sci-fi future really connects with you, deeply? I list three with increasing depressive-ness.

1. Star Trek TNG (Happy-ish)

Humans have a united world government. Everyone treats each other courteously, on the whole. Machines are clean and grease-free. When people die they just fly off intact with sooty phaser wounds. Aliens share human virtues and can be your bosom buddies. A robot can be a highly respected member of the crew. Aliens can also be sulky, but usually negotiable.

Unlikely, very unlikely, maybe, LOL, unlikely enough to be indistinguishable from impossible, likely but not as presented in TNG, ditto previous comment re aliens

2. Star Wars IV-V-VI (Despotic)

Humans have a failed galactic republic. Everyone treats each other with suspicion, often with contempt. Machines are greasy and need an occasional jolt to work. When people die they can be burnt to a crisp skeleton or sliced into two. Aliens share human failings, robots are your best friend. Aliens can also be sulky, manipulative, evil, violent and barely negotiable.

Impossible for all practical concerns, unlikely, more likely than above, pretty much as now, ditto previous comment re aliens, no, ditto previous comment re aliens

3. Aliens series (Downright depressing)

Humans are governed by evil corporations that are a terrible excuse for "government". Everyone treats each other like a meat byproduct. Machines are dank, creaky and unreliable most of the time. When people die they spill their guts in the most nightmarish manner possible. Aliens are completely inhumane at all levels, robots cannot be trusted. Aliens are not negotiable. Period.

Very unlikely, very unlikely, very unlikely, pretty close to now, most likely, very very unlikely, ditto previous comment re aliens

I can definitely see us heading for a Starship Troopers future.

Starship Troopers (Depressing? Or bloody entertaining shit?)

Since you're talking about the movie, how about just shit? :)

Humans are governed by a fascist militaristic world government. Everyone looks Aryan, are encouraged to grab boobs in the park and serve in the Federal Service. Which is both nice and vicious, at different levels. Machines look sleek on the outside but shudder a lot inside, and they use machine guns and 90's CRT monitors. When people die they spill way more guts than can possibly fit into their bodies in the first place. They also contain liquidy brains that are easy to suck in one big slurp. Aliens are arachnid warriors that are not negotiable, 'cept if you shoot their nerve stem. Then they go down quick, but you still have another 30,000 more to go.

LOL, LOL, :rolleyes:, just like now, like now, you'd be surprised, ditto, LOL

Go grab the book, it's soooo much better.

The most realistic near future SF would be something like Bruce Sterling's novels Islands in the Net (http://www.streettech.com/bcp/BCPgraf/Media/islands.htm) or Distraction (http://www.infinityplus.co.uk/nonfiction/distract.htm) or Nancy Kress's Beggars in Spain (http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/fantasy_and_science_fiction/18597). Longer term, John Varley's "Eight Worlds" books look good.

'Kay, I don't think he meant which one was the most likely but which one you'd want to see.

I, of course, would want to see Trek the most. After all, the technology from Trek is superior to most other sci-fi, and I'd love to explore the galaxy all on my lonesome.

But none of these are going to happen. For that matter, nor is Stargate, Warhammer 40K, Predator, Discworld, or anything else you can think of. We can't say what will happen, unless one of you happens to be a time traveler that has information.

The Starship Troopers book and the Starship Troopers movie should never be compared by anybody who understands them. Both had totally different goals, and both achieved their totally different goals.

Starship Troopers (Depressing? Or bloody entertaining shit?)

Humans are governed by a fascist militaristic world government. Everyone looks Aryan, are encouraged to grab boobs in the park and serve in the Federal Service. Which is both nice and vicious, at different levels. Machines look sleek on the outside but shudder a lot inside, and they use machine guns and 90's CRT monitors. When people die they spill way more guts than can possibly fit into their bodies in the first place. They also contain liquidy brains that are easy to suck in one big slurp. Aliens are arachnid warriors that are not negotiable, 'cept if you shoot their nerve stem. Then they go down quick, but you still have another 30,000 more to go.
You obviously watched the movie without reading the book! TSK!

The book is almost unbelievably better: the world government is not "fascist militaristic," everyone isn't "Aryan," and the weapons are what you would expect for the time frame. :p

The Starship Troopers book and the Starship Troopers movie should never be compared by anybody who understands them. Both had totally different goals, and both achieved their totally different goals.
...that piece of shit movie was based on a book?!

The Starship Troopers book and the Starship Troopers movie should never be compared by anybody who understands them. Both had totally different goals, and both achieved their totally different goals.

Yay somebody gets it!

...that piece of shit movie was based on a book?!

Quite a famous one by Robert Heinlein, which, as several people have said, is a lot better than the movie.

Quite a famous one by Robert Heinlein, which, as several people have said, is a lot better than the movie.
...huh. Once again, my true ignorance is revealed for what it is.

Starship Troopers was a good film, like other veerhoven stuff Total Recall (based on a Philiop K Dick short story), robocop.

Must read the book though - who wrote it and where can I get a copy.

I'd always go for the vision of the future in Akira, Bladerunner, or in the books by Richard Morgan the first of which is 'Altrered Carbon', just because they're all nasty, cruel and cool.

If anything I would say the future of Banks's Culture novels - a subtle blend of Marx* and Brautigan**.

* obvious enough, I would have thought.
** 'watched over by machines of loving grace'

...huh. Once again, my true ignorance is revealed for what it is.

No worries. Ignorance is in itself not shameful. Willful ignorance on the otherhand...

Get thee to the library, posthaste.

Starship Troopers was a good film, like other veerhoven stuff Total Recall (based on a Philiop K Dick short story), robocop.

Just don't say that too loudly among fans of the book. It might get you shoved out an airlock... :p

Must read the book though - who wrote it and where can I get a copy.

Missed that one did we? Robert Heinlein is the author. It should be available at the local bookstore or library. His novel The Moon is a Harsh Mistress is also quite a good read. Both are highly political.

I'd always go for the vision of the future in Akira, Bladerunner, or in the books by Richard Morgan the first of which is 'Altrered Carbon', just because they're all nasty, cruel and cool.

And we all know which book Bladerunner was based on, don't we?

You left out the Firefly option.

No aliens, an odd divide between very high tech and very low tech depending on wealth.

Oh shit totally forgot about Iain M Banks. Ok, FAR future would be that.

Thanks for the tip-off to Robert Heinlein.

Nice to meet a fellow fan, track down 'Second Angel' by Philip Kerr - it's a bank heist on the moon and great sci-fi, totally believeable vision of the future.

Debt repayed.

Dystopian futures are a dime a dozen and often only distinguishable from each other by super-fine degrees of grey. 'Corporate takeovers' and 'corporate republics' (alternatively, plug in 'fascist' for 'corporate') are a way of saying "I didn't have an original vision for my work but wanted to write a gritty futuristic action movie. Sorry. Please enjoy this overused junk instead."

Babylon 5, which I consider the true middle ground between dystopia and utopia in popular science fiction, at least had an original concept. It's probably my favorite 'hard' science fiction program (though, of course, there is a limit to how 'hard' any television program can be. I've heard the new Battlestar Galactica is very accurate, but I don't get cable), which is saying something. I'm not a big fan of the "tried and true" formula that 'the state of being gritty and realistic is equal to having artistic merit', but I think that the geo-political structure present in B5 is probably the most true to the modern world of the major alternatives out there.

I am also willing to trust to hope. A lot of people have been snubbing Star Trek's (Read: Gene Roddenberry's. It's been nothing but downhill since he passed away) vision of the future because it's not 'realistic' (see the above formula). I think it's possible, if unlikely, and I am willing to believe in the human spirit and hope for our ability to overcome ourselves. Hell, I'm even willing to trust to the hope that, despite its announced writers and director, the new Trek movie will be decent. Yeah, this is all very sappy. Shut up!

Warhammer 40k.

Captures human nature quite well, I think.
I second that and congratulate you on this post :D

Halflife 2 seems about right. Just remove the aliens.

Hrmmm, so we'd be facing a megalomaniacal society run by a pseudo intellectual fascist and a ground level resistance led by a one legged black scientist?

Oh, and a rebel leader with a government hazard suit and a crowbar? :p

Bah... my vision of a Sci-Fi future would be more like the net-world described in the Otherland series... The world is pretty much like it is now, just even more so run by huge, global companys, people go through their lives and spend alot of it on 'the net', where almost anything is possible in virtual reality. It's already starting, www.secondlife.com is just the beginning. I'm quite looking forward to it...

No one's mentioned it yet, so how about a vision of the future from an underpraised author, Mr M. Barry:rolleyes:

Babylon 5, which I consider the true middle ground between dystopia and utopia in popular science fiction, at least had an original concept.

I don't remember much about Babylon 5. How was the governmental system set up?

Cause the way I see things, if we ever do get off this rock in a serious way, human governmental structures would be somewhat on a even footing with mega-corporations I think. I mean, think about it. Most governments lack the kind of serious funding it takes to go to space, while the corporations that do are restricted by law.

Once you get up to space, whose law applies? Far as I know, only those with the muscle to make it so and stay independent of Terran influence.

I'd probably say a fractured region of planetary/system governors with an ineffectual main body where representatives get to sit and yell at each other. Kinda like the UN. Only difference is that we'd probably only have a small handful of members due to the limited areas of possible colonization within reasonable reach going to the fastest. Slower governments wouldn't be able to spread as fast and would be kept from expanding due to rising distances involved.

So we'd see Earth II, galaxy edition.

I see the world coming together into an organization united by commerce. Borders will become stilll more ill-defined as people will simply go where the jobs are, and not care too much about the politics. On a global government scale, individual member-states of the UN will be required to guarantee democracy and emmigration (and possibly immigration). There will be serious talk of a global socialist state, but such attempts will fall apart, although socialists will retain some elements of socialism in the global government and will be allowed to have socialist member-states. Ultimately, I see the world in 200 years to be a global confederacy, with some power reserved by the global government and most of the power remaining with the member states.

Oh, and messy and boring. So many futuristic theories are very pristine and sexy. As the cultures of the world start to blend, the result will be somewhere between the United States, Europe, and Asia. Lots of skyscrapers, lots of commerce, and lots of secularism.

What everyone seems to have forgotten about here is Unreal/Unreal Tournament. That might make for an interesting future(Veld wants her rocket launchers and spiffy Nali floaty islands). But, for a more realistic future, look towards Mad Max-it's the most likely to happen, barring a miraculous discovery of superfuel that can be cheaply and quickly switched to, as well as being 100% environmentally friendly and easy to use. Or an alien invasion, A.I. takeover, or nuclear holocaust over the last drop of cheap, easy-to-refine oil. However, I will ALWAYS have a special place in my heart for Star Trek(despite it's butchering in recent times)as at the very least being something to strive for.

Edit: There's also the Dorasi! series, too.

But, for a more realistic future, look towards Mad Max-it's the most likely to happen, barring a miraculous discovery of superfuel that can be cheaply and quickly switched to, as well as being 100% environmentally friendly and easy to use. Or an alien invasion, A.I. takeover, or nuclear holocaust over the last drop of cheap, easy-to-refine oil.

Somebody didn't pay attention to Mad Max...

I had my own scenario of what the world could look like in a relatively near future.

Mars about to be properly colonized, deep space mining operations harvest resources from the asteroid belt, and the major powers of the earth share the responsibility of policing sectors of space. Travel would be pretty much limited to the inner part of the solar system, though, for lack of faster engines.

Lets be realistic here.

Space exploration? Needs fuel.

Mass migrations of people for jobs? Needs fuel.

Discovery of aliens? That tinfoil hat looks nice on you.

We're running out of oil, coal will pour tons of carbon into our atmosphere thus heating up the planet, and we don't have a superfuel on our horizon.

Mad Max is the most likely possibility.

It's Mad Max for us unless we go into space. We need the resources out there to continue to grow.

As to what it will be like: I'll go with Bruce Sterling's Maker/Shaper universe, as bound up in Schismatrix Plus. Humans take control of our ability to evolve, and do so - in every direction.

Lets be realistic here.

Space exploration? Needs fuel.

Mass migrations of people for jobs? Needs fuel.

Discovery of aliens? That tinfoil hat looks nice on you.

We're running out of oil, coal will pour tons of carbon into our atmosphere thus heating up the planet, and we don't have a superfuel on our horizon.

Mad Max is the most likely possibility.

I both agree and disagree. true, space exploration requires fuel, but not necessarily one that's petroleum-based. The Space Shuttle's main engines run on liquid hydrogen and oxygen, and the solid rocket boosters run on a solid fuel composed of ammonium perchlorate (oxidizer, 69.6 % by weight), aluminum (fuel, 16 %), iron oxide (a catalyst, 0.4 %), a polymer (such as PBAN or HTPB - a binder that holds the mixture together, 12.04 %), and an epoxy curing agent (1.96 %).

Having said that, I believe that we're in for a rough time in the future due to overpopulation. The Earth has resources enough for us for now, but it won't be long before population worldwide becomes a serious problem. To avert that, we would need a mass exodus to begin colonizing other worlds right NOW. Obviously, that's not going to happen. We don't have anywhere for billions to go, let alone how to get them there. We're going to have to overcome a global population crisis before we get anywhere.

We're also going to have to switch to nuclear power, as Thracymacus said, it pollutes the atmosphere to use coal. (And ironically, releases more radiation into the atmosphere than nuclear power does. go figure.)

So maybe what we are looking at is a Lost in Space type future, where man is forced to resort to drastic measures to try and relieve the pressure on the planet by inventing technologies for jumpgates, space exploration and colonization.

Just because we run out of fossil fuels dosen't mean armageddon just a return to pre-industrial society

You left out the Firefly option.

No aliens, an odd divide between very high tech and very low tech depending on wealth.
YAYAYAYAYAY!!!! Coolest future ever!
(I was playing paintball yesterday, and our last game was almost like a Western shoot-out. I was wishing for a brown duster and some really tight pants...)

Yay for 40K too. One of the coolest future visions I've come across, specially in the older school stuff - Exterminatus on an entire planet INCLUDING the army that had just liberated it because they had been fighting Chaos and were corrupted. :D
Not so fun in real life though. I think we'll just get more of the same until we all end up in a communist utopia or nuke ourselves to bits. One or the other.

Lets be realistic here.

Space exploration? Needs fuel.

Mass migrations of people for jobs? Needs fuel.

Discovery of aliens? That tinfoil hat looks nice on you.

We're running out of oil, coal will pour tons of carbon into our atmosphere thus heating up the planet, and we don't have a superfuel on our horizon.

Mad Max is the most likely possibility.

Like it or not, we do have a superfuel right now, nuclear. I don't like it much, but if it gets us off this delicate little planet and buys us some time, it's better than scrabbling in the mud till we fade away to extinction.

After that, 2300AD!

Just because we run out of fossil fuels dosen't mean armageddon just a return to pre-industrial society

That may be worse. Early pre-industrial societies existed on a rich, healthy planet; future pre-industrial societies will be living on a depleted dirty husk. Ultimately, the pre-industrial option is just a toll-booth on the turnpike to armageddon. We go out with a whimper, throwing rocks at each other, rather than a bang, nuking ourselves to death. At least the bang is quick.

We need space. Read Pounelle's "A Step Further Out." The guys a rampant capitalist-conservative, but he's right about the industrialization of space.

After that, 2300AD!

Let's just hope we don;t have to go through the Twilight War to get there...

YAYAYAYAYAY!!!! Coolest future ever!

Firefly with FTL and a bit of exploration around the periphery, would be about my favorite.

Yay for 40K too. One of the coolest future visions I've come across, specially in the older school stuff - Exterminatus on an entire planet INCLUDING the army that had just liberated it because they had been fighting Chaos and were corrupted. :D

Really wouldn't want to live there.

Not so fun in real life though. I think we'll just get more of the same until we all end up in a communist utopia or nuke ourselves to bits. One or the other.

Or a capitalist "utopia." Actually, if I have to have total-capitalism, I guess the Libertarian thing might be worth considering. You know, If we're all working in company-town sweatshops anyway...

Let's just hope we don;t have to go through the Twilight War to get there...

At least wait until I die of old, old, old age :)

At least wait until I die of old, old, old age :)

Well the Twilight War was supposed to start in 1995. There's a reason the game based on it was called Twlight 2000 after all. :p

And good to see that somebody remembers the old school games.

If anything, our world will drift the closest to cyberpunk novels and films, where corporations are the government and the gap between rich and poor has become an ocean where the middle class fell in and drowned.

Having said that, I believe that we're in for a rough time in the future due to overpopulation. The Earth has resources enough for us for now, but it won't be long before population worldwide becomes a serious problem. To avert that, we would need a mass exodus to begin colonizing other worlds right NOW. Obviously, that's not going to happen. We don't have anywhere for billions to go, let alone how to get them there. We're going to have to overcome a global population crisis before we get anywhere.

Overpopulation is a myth, if it gets to the point where parents realise that any child they have will simply not be able to be fed or have space to grow up in, they will simply not have that child. I've heard some theories that in the West, which is the world's oldest industrialised civilisation, the cultural changes that have been seen recently, (i.e. reluctance to start families, wider acceptance of homosexuality, etc.) are all part of a mass sub-conscious drive to avoid the supposed terror of overpopulation.

But in answer to the OP's question, I optimistically believe that there will be a Star Trek-style society in the future, but I am certain that we will go through hell in order to achieve it (those who remember their Trek will know that Earth only consdered uniting after the whole planet shared in the horror of WWIII and the despotic rule of Khan Noonian Singh).

Somebody didn't pay attention to Mad Max...

I meant the sort of nuclear holocaust that would cause thermonuclear winter and the near-to-total extinction of the human race, allowing for bugs and rodents to take over the Earth. It seemed to me in the movies that, while nukes were used, they weren't used to that extent. I could be wrong, of course-perhaps Australia somehow got spared the winter, but I doubt it.

On another note, another series to mention for possible future outcomes would be Ghost In The Shell. Take your pick of manga, anime, and the 2 movies for which version you prefer, but as near as I can tell, they all exist within the same future construct, just with some continuity differences.

I both agree and disagree. true, space exploration requires fuel, but not necessarily one that's petroleum-based. The Space Shuttle's main engines run on liquid hydrogen and oxygen, and the solid rocket boosters run on a solid fuel composed of ammonium perchlorate (oxidizer, 69.6 % by weight), aluminum (fuel, 16 %), iron oxide (a catalyst, 0.4 %), a polymer (such as PBAN or HTPB - a binder that holds the mixture together, 12.04 %), and an epoxy curing agent (1.96 %).

Having said that, I believe that we're in for a rough time in the future due to overpopulation. The Earth has resources enough for us for now, but it won't be long before population worldwide becomes a serious problem. To avert that, we would need a mass exodus to begin colonizing other worlds right NOW. Obviously, that's not going to happen. We don't have anywhere for billions to go, let alone how to get them there. We're going to have to overcome a global population crisis before we get anywhere.

We're also going to have to switch to nuclear power, as Thracymacus said, it pollutes the atmosphere to use coal. (And ironically, releases more radiation into the atmosphere than nuclear power does. go figure.)

So maybe what we are looking at is a Lost in Space type future, where man is forced to resort to drastic measures to try and relieve the pressure on the planet by inventing technologies for jumpgates, space exploration and colonization.

See space exploration is a fickle issue. Yes, the fuel that these spaceships use is not petroleum base (the energy return on investment is not high enough to propel these ships) but the processes with which we harness the oxygen and hydrogen is petroleum based, as is the process with which we compress this fuel. Thus, to begin true space exploration we still need to shed our petroleum shackles.

The question of nuclear fuels is an important issue today. Frankly I'm pro nuclear, but that doesn't mean that nuclear energy is a solution to this problem. It's really a Faustian bargain - we may live jolly lives for the next 100-200 years because of nuclear energy, but we're selling our great-granchildren to the devil if we employ this. Furtheremore, creating a holistic nuclear program is not in our immediate future. Nuclear plants are expensive and time consuming to build.

Ultimately, I'm a fan of the systems approach to energy. It's a green fuels with nuclear/fossil fuels. With the systems approach humanity strives to harness energy in the most efficient manner possible. Why import oil to run power plants in areas such as Africa and the Middle East? Why not just create vast tracts of solar panels? Why don't we dam more rivers or create more windmills and use these tools to alleviate our reliance of fossil fuels? It's not perfect, but it could be that buffer system that we need before we control fusion.

And to respond to QuentinTarantino's views on how the end of the age of oil is not the apocalypse but really a reversion back to a feudal system I have to say that a feudal system is the apocalypse to the vast majority of humanity. We have such a large population thanks to the Green Revolution (the system with which we use fossil fuels as fertilizer [see Haber Process]) and without this most of humanity will die. Sure some lucky SOBs will survive (my money's on the Bush family) but most of mankind won't.

And I'm not even going to begin on how soil erosion and global warming will further exacerbate the end of the age of oil.

P.S. I forgot to say that the materials needed for nuclear energy is are also finite resources. Nuclear is not a superfuel, it's just a buffer between us and whatever comes next.

Just don't say that too loudly among fans of the book. It might get you shoved out an airlock... :p

I don't think that the movie was meant to be enjoyed like the book. It's a satirical over-the-top fascist blood-fest. A true Verhoeven classic.

And we all know which book Bladerunner was based on, don't we?

Not to under-rate the book, but Scott has definitely produced a masterpiece in the flick, especially the Director's cut version. I can't decide whether Blade Runner is more depressing than Alien though, more within the spectrum. At least the replicants were "more human than human." :D

Really wouldn't want to live there.
Me neither. Maybe as an Inquisitor, but otherwise no fething way.

Or a capitalist "utopia." Actually, if I have to have total-capitalism, I guess the Libertarian thing might be worth considering. You know, If we're all working in company-town sweatshops anyway...
That would be us nuking each other to death... It's just another form of competition, after all. :p

Fusion is the only real solution to the power problem I can see that will allow us to live like we do. Renewables are more expensive, and more importantly, take up much more space (I think George Monbiot said that something like six times Britain's arable land would need to be converted in biofuel to feed just its transport fuel needs).
Space poses the problem of it being horrendously expensive to get anything up there. Now, while I'm sure that industialisation will lead to economies of scale, we're talking about four to six orders of magnitude here to make it anywhere near possible. Nuclear fission is far too risky for a spacecraft - there will be accidents when you launch a couple of tons of metal and uranium and ceramics and people into the sky at a couple of miles a second. I'd rather not be scattered with crazy fallout on a semi-regular basis...

I don't think that the movie was meant to be enjoyed like the book. It's a satirical over-the-top fascist blood-fest. A true Verhoeven classic.

I wouldn't have a problem with the film if it had remained Bug Hunt at Outpost Nine instead of being mis-represented as Heinlein's Starship Troopers. To clarify, what would be your reaction if Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings featured evil Hobbits and stupid elves who randomly start a war with the Orcs, while leaving out any mention of magic, rings, or Gandalf. That's essentially what Verhoeven did to Starship Troopers by making it into a "fascist blood-fest", bastardising the themes, and leaving out major plot elements. But what do you expect seeing as he couldn't be bothered to read the whole book (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120201/trivia), unlike Ridley Scott, who made it required reading for the cast of Aliens.

Not to under-rate the book, but Scott has definitely produced a masterpiece in the flick, especially the Director's cut version. I can't decide whether Blade Runner is more depressing than Alien though, more within the spectrum. At least the replicants were "more human than human." :D

On this I will agree (it's one of my two favorite films, afterall.)

Unlocked the hatch? They are just fuckin' animals man!

Your quote is wrong...its,

"cut the power? WHAT DO YOU MEAN THEY CUT THE POWER!? THEY'RE FUCKING ANIMALS MAN!!! What the hell..."

I voted Star Trek, being an unregenerate '60s idealist. But then I remembered Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Earth will be removed for an intergalactic bypass.

I want a Farscape sci-fi future if only so I can have some hot Nebari lovin', but really its viewpoint of self-interest + familial/friendship attachments competing for survival vs. militarism (and other self-interested parties) has an appeal of its own.

The Xenosaga universe has the appeal of humanity being spread far and wide, an unlimited power source, and private corporations and military federations facing off against religious wackos for control of that power source--and who are also fighting over access to the "holy land" of Lost Jerusalem. Hmm, wait a minute, that sounds awfully familiar...well, the Middle East doesn't have the Gnosis so it's not exactly the same. :p

As for the poll options, I wouldn't want anything to do with a Star Trek future though, too sterile; Star Wars is a bit too ascetic for my tastes, at least the Old Republic; and Aliens is just grotesque.

Oh, and I would recommend that the realists who deride space exploration for its energy costs look up Helium 3.

Your quote is wrong...its,

"cut the power? WHAT DO YOU MEAN THEY CUT THE POWER!? THEY'RE FUCKING ANIMALS MAN!!! What the hell..."

Ah someone was paying attention. Thanks dude. ;)

Oh, and I would recommend that the realists who deride space exploration for its energy costs look up Helium 3.

Helium-3 requires even better technology then the technology that we don't have for normal fusion. Helium-3 needs a reaction that is 10x hotter then D-T fusion.

It also exists in minute quanities on Earth and is theorized, not proven, to exist on the moon and the local gas giants. Solar harvesting would be cool, but how are we supposed to do that when NASA's funding is getting cut and few other nations (or private enterprises) are looking into this?

It would be nice, but it's highly unlikely.

"I've seen the future. Know what it is? It's a 47-year-old virgin sitting around in his pajamas, sipping a banana-broccoli shake, singing 'I'm the Oscar Meyer wiener'."


That's our future.

I don't know what you guys are talking about. Humans don't have a future.

Matrix all the way. Surrender to the Robot overlords now, and they may not turn you into batteries...
No time for that. I got brain-slug duty.

After a healthy four-hour helping of The Hypno-toad Show.

Not to under-rate the book, but Scott has definitely produced a masterpiece in the flick, especially the Director's cut version. I can't decide whether Blade Runner is more depressing than Alien though, more within the spectrum. At least the replicants were "more human than human." :D
And as for Blade Runner, what did you think of "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?"?
I liked it but they were two different stories, really.

Not to under-rate the book, but Scott has definitely produced a masterpiece in the flick, especially the Director's cut version. I can't decide whether Blade Runner is more depressing than Alien though, more within the spectrum. At least the replicants were "more human than human." :D

I especially like the way Scott provides so many clues about Deckard's 'true nature'...