It's the year 2025. Almost everything you use today is a smart-device. You need to charge your phone, laptop, watch, glasses, wallet, keychains and your shoes before your leave to work everyday.
What's gonna happen in the next 25 years?
>>55496670
You'll make another shitpost on /g/.
The desire for practicality will triumph, OR we'll live to see the omnipresence of power sources.
Probably both. USB hubs in airport terminals is only the beginning.
That being said, most "smart" devices right now are way ahead of their time, and will either be combined or simplified. In 10-20 years, AR devices will replace smartphones and smartwatches. You'll have a brick in your pocket, probably, to do all the heavy computational lifting and graphics processing, but people will start adopting AR tech regardless en masse within a decade or two.
Smart wallets/keychains/stuff like that won't see much saturation if they need a regular charge. I can see trackers being implemented, and small features being snuck into devices, but I don't think anything that has a risk of running out of power will be trustworthy enough to keep someone's wallet/keys safe. All that being said, if wireless charging tech becomes universal, or at least gets big, I can see people just dumping the contents of their pockets onto a large wireless charging mat before they go to bed each night.
What the fuck would we put in shoes? I can see Nike stuffing Fitbit tech into a couple sneakers a few years from now, but if that catches on, it certainly won't survive long with a USB-C port on the side.
>>55496670
first we'll get wireless charging everywhere, then everybody will get cancer, then everyone will die, the end
We'll have the USB Tire.
>>55496670
>implying a Trump presidency won't put a stop to the touchscreen meme
Your scenario is dead in the water.
Anti-surveillance sentiment is only going to rise from here on out, and considering the only current way of avoiding contemporary x86 processors is by buying ARM or getting 2000s technology, it seems that future technology (if the market responds) will be a downgrade rather than something new like a smart house.
Something needs to be done about energy usage, though. We can't keep using fossil fuels forever. I think we'll have AI robots by then.
>>55496699
fpbp even has the digits to prove it
>>55497008
What does surveillance have anything to do with touchscreens?
>>55497008
>Trump supporter
>anti-surveillance
I'm going to go ahead and assume that you have some kind of brain hemorrhaging going on. Trump openly supports censorship of his detractors and suggested a boycott on Apple for having strong encryption.
>>55497028
Smart devices and touchscreens are bound up as an idea at this point in time. I don't think too much tech right now that is trying to be "smart" is focusing on real world physical components for the interface.
The x86 architecture is ARM's main competitor at the moment for advanced consumer grade CPUs, led by AMD and Intel, both of whom have spyware implemented at the very root of the product.
The most advanced tech is in the hands of companies who collude with the anti-privacy governments.
>>55497070
First of all, who said I was a Trump supporter? After yesterday, you have to be a cynic, hopelessly stupid, or a shill to believe that Hillary could or should win in November. I'm more anti-Hillary than I am pro-Trump. I don't like everything Trump says, like how he denies global warming, but I like where he stands on other issues, like being honest about Islamic terrorism, that the other mainstream candidate ignores.
I'm assuming that you're talking about this, unless you point out tome other places where he is pro-censorship or anti-privacy (which I would appreciate, in fact).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwIJzXrzpek
I don't interpret this as being anti-privacy at all. This is about a clear case of wrong-doing that the government knows about, not some random suspicion.
Besides, if you think about events down the line, there's a lot of leeway for good things to happen with Trump in office. He'll put the brakes on TTIP, he cannot put the brakes on COP21 if Obama does his job before he's out, the government's power does not become more centralized and corporatized, etc.
>>55497070
Anon literally BTFO
>>55496670
Trump will had of already made Made America Great Again 4 times.
>>55497321
See >>55497218
>>55497342
Only 2 elections = 2 times
>>55497218
"We're going to open up those libel laws. So when The New York Times writes a hit piece which is a total disgrace or when The Washington Post, which is there for other reasons, writes a hit piece, we can sue them and win money..."
I don't have the original source for this one, but it's all over the place. Simply google "trump libel laws".
This is Trump calling for a boycott of Apple for not giving up cell phone info
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/700796528844103680
He's also stated that he would like to censor parts of the Internet
“I would certainly be open to closing areas where we are at war with somebody,”
https://youtu.be/eY7FIS028u8
These are three examples just off of the top of my head. I suppose you may be right about Trump being better than Clinton, but he's most definitely an authoritarian.
>>55497513
Found the source.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9PCPtcsgnc
After seeing Buzzfeed's twitter or whoever it was take Trump's Orlando shooting tweet and say he was "congratulating" himself or boasting, I have no doubt that what he said in this speech is true—the media is dishonest and has no qualms about spinning things falsely if they aren't lying outright. I see where he's coming from and I don't necessarily disagree.
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/700796528844103680
>regarding radical Islamic terrorist couple
He doesn't say he wants average everyday Americans' cell phone info. He wants the criminals' data to be handed over.
>https://youtu.be/eY7FIS028u8
Again, he's talking about Islamic terrorism. Why are you defending it?
Even when Wolf asks him that stubborn,retarded question at the end, Trump insists that he's just looking for solutions as to how we can make it more difficult for people Americans to communicate with ISIS or other threats to the country. It could be as simple as blocking their servers. All he is saying in that video is that we need to stop terrorists recruiting online. Who disagrees with this?
>These are three examples just off of the top of my head. I suppose you may be right about Trump being better than Clinton, but he's most definitely an authoritarian.
You are so cucked, my friend, that you think anti-terrorism = Islamophobia = authoritarianism. Looked at another way, Trump is pro American safety and his opponents are anti Trump, to the point where they will twist simple statements like in your post to something totally unrelated.
>>55497070
>Trump openly supports censorship of his detractors and suggested a boycott on Apple for having strong encryption.
No. Based off the posts I just finished typing and responding to, you fell for the media's lies and spin. Look again.
Most of the world accepts phones as a communication device/entertainment device already. Laptops and tablets are already established too. Laptops usually charge for most people at work or remain largely plugged in, people usually charge phones overnight, and tablets don't usually require daily charging unless used heavily.
Smart watches will end up winning for a portion of the population. The power consumption requirements will get lower for acceptable performance, especially once people realize that they are best for basic NFC payments, occasional heart rate measurements, and filtering notifications.
>glasses
Smart glasses failed, the profile for a battery that can provide any useful view, plus the display for projection and for seeing things (AR) is too large to be fashionable or unobtrusive on a face.
>keychains
Literally what
>shoes
We have passive sensors here, what value would a battery provide beyond your shitposting?
>>55497774
>what value would a battery provide beyond your shitposting?
On the go hardstyle that beats everytime you take a step
I hope laptops as a design start becoming unfashionable and we get some designs akin to coolness as pic related, or something entirely new yet functional
>>55497824
If not, custom computers—not just desktop pcs—will become more and more a thing—just look at the creativity with raspberry pi projects
>>55497774
Google Glass was way ahead of its time. Give it 20 years, max.
>>55497716
>After seeing Buzzfeed's twitter or whoever...
So one far-left news site posted some shit, therefore he should be able to sue any papers that print articles critical of him. Magnificent logic my friend. In any case, the president should not be using his powers to bully newspapers into being afraid to write about him.
>He doesn't say he wants average
I suppose I could give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that he's ignorant on the subject, but creating a backdoor (which is what the actual case was about) would compromise all users, not just the criminal.
>Again, he's talking about Islamic terrorism
>You are so cucked, my friend, that you think anti-terrorism = Islamophobia = authoritarianism
Are you being serious? Threats of terror have been used multiple times before as an excuse for increasing government power and censoring the people. I agree that the problem needs to be solved, but not at the cost of people's liberties. If you honestly believe that Trump and the government are promoting censorship in your best interests, it is YOU who are cucked, my friend.
>What's gonna happen in the next 25 years?
your augmented bodyparts needs to be charged too. Imagine /g/ finally about to lose their virginity only to find out their dick is out of battery.
>>55496883
Pretty much this. We'll probably have an electromagnetic field covering all of Earth that charges everything inside it.
>>55497928
>always on cameras that are pointed at you whenever someone gazes at you
The public already rejected this idea and people got punched in the face, the only reason they are still on sale is because AdSense gives Google enough money to be able to put on a show for pride.
>not throwing all of your devices on a wireless charging pad
What, are you poor, op?
>>55498003
It'll take time for AR glasses to get their reputation back after Glassholes, of course. But I think once people see what Meta and Magic Leap are doing, people's opinions might change.
Outside of a telephone, desktop, and vehicle: I don't want a smart anything.
>>55498084
+1000000000
>>55498084
>vehicle
neither
>>55497936
>So one far-left news site posted some shit, therefore he should be able to sue any papers that print articles critical of him.
No. It was such blatant bullshit that it was just breaking the camel's back that was already loaded down by blatant mainstream news hit pieces against him. No doubt there are articles that criticize him over actual issues. But a large majority of them are merely grasping at straws in an attempt to portray him as a racist, sexist, authoritarian fascist. If you look at their evidence, none of that is evident. This certainly counts as libel, and anybody would want to sue someone to hell for talking shit about them that's just straight up not true and completely socially ostracizing. What's worse than being called a racist in America in 2016?
There's "being critical" and then there's mudslinging.
>but creating a backdoor (which is what the actual case was about) would compromise all users, not just the criminal.
There's a difference between Apple opening it up for this one case and Apple showing the FBI/CIA or whoever how to do this for everyone else. What would have stopped this from being a one time deal (as long as another terrorist didn't act and happen to have an iPhone)?
>Threats of terror have been used multiple times before as an excuse for increasing government power and censoring the people.
I'm completely aware of this. 15 years ago is not that long ago.
>I agree that the problem needs to be solved, but not at the cost of people's liberties.
So do I, but perhaps we should change it to "citizens' liberties". The moment you shoot against America or its people, you cease to be a citizen.
>If you honestly believe that Trump and the government are promoting censorship in your best interests, it is YOU who are cucked, my friend.
The bottom line is that we're talking about specific terrorist cases here. Show me where he says law abiding citizens should not have privacy rights and we will have more to talk about.
>>55497959
lol. but second the idea that mechanical body parts will be the new prosthetics. we're almost already there
>>55498084
Smart guns. Use your imagination.
>>55498213
I don't want a smart gun. That's adding one more failure point in a potential life and death situation.
>>55498267
I do eagerly await when there's widespread implant technology that makes keys and credit cards irrelevant.
>>55498267
I'm envisioning auto-targeting systems that sync with smart glasses (>>55497774). The HUD also provides magazine bullet count, just like a motherfucking video game.
>>55498184
>There's a difference between Apple opening it up for this one case and Apple showing the FBI/CIA
And how would Apple open it up for this one case? You can't have encryption that can only be opened by certain people. It's either crackable, or it isn't.
>So do I, but perhaps we should change it to "citizens' liberties"
>The bottom line is that we're talking about specific terrorist cases here
Perhaps there was a misunderstanding here. I was referring to Trump's plans for censoring parts of the Internet with the justification of "ISIS is recruiting through the Internet". This does harm the citizens' liberties. You can't fight bad ideas by hiding them.
>>55496670
I do? Well, I can't change what I don't have, uh?
>>55498379
>And how would Apple open it up for this one case? You can't have encryption that can only be opened by certain people. It's either crackable, or it isn't.
I looked up the case and found this vid.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Tbt_5k6p2s
It says that Apple almost certainly could not create the software necessary to allow the FBI access. But on the off chance they could, I did find two concerns compelling: that that software could remain in the hands of the FBI for use whenever, or the success of this one time would lead the FBI to come back and demand more hacks for future but lesser cases. If there was a a way to allow them access for it this ONE time (barring something that is certainly just as significant, like Omar Mateen's shooting), I would be for it. But if there's no way around those two issues, then I agree that Apple shouldn't do it.
>I was referring to Trump's plans for censoring parts of the Internet with the justification of "ISIS is recruiting through the Internet".
No misunderstanding here. Those "parts of the internet" he was talking about were ISIS sites.
>You can't fight bad ideas by hiding them.
It's not the ideas that are being fought here, man. You are cutting off a potential recruitment supply chain. That's fighting the group itself.
>>55496930
Spherical tires are the actual future, but I would not expect a technology forum to know anything about actual technology
>>55497824
>I hope laptops as a design start becoming unfashionable and we get some designs akin to coolness as pic related
You do realize that laptops and UMPCs like in your picture fill completely different rolls, don't you? UMPCs fill the same roll as a smartphone/tablet.
>>55498525
So let's recap.
>there is nothing anti privacy about expecting companies write malware and sign malware for the government
>internet censorship is okay because it's against views I don't agree with
And you call others cucks. I'd love to see how you react if Trump does get his way, then in a few year the Democrats regain the presidency and you're in the crosshairs. Remember events don't occur in a vacuum. Precedents are set and you will have no control over what future cases they will be applied in.
>>55498832
>You do realize that laptops and UMPCs like in your picture fill completely different rolls, don't you? UMPCs fill the same roll as a smartphone/tablet.
First, I was referring to the novelty of UMPC's and how even a class of computers like them yielded such a wide variety in design. If you look at the UMPCs ever made, they resemble each other very little, and that's interesting. Whereas laptops all look basically the fucking same. It's really boring. Surely there's not much reason to try and diverge from a design that functions like it needs to, such as with laptops, but when you're looking for reasons to buy a product in a market like this, you feel like you don't have as much choice as you could.
That said, secondly, there's no reason why handheld PCs can't take the place of both smartphone and laptops, theoretically.
>there is nothing anti privacy about expecting companies write malware and sign malware for the government
Since you refuse to stick to specific cases and insist on generalizing, I will go there with you. The government should not be allowed to break into people's devices whenever they want. Nor should the producers of these devices enable them to do so. That includes installing backdoors at the CPU level, and writing cracking software. Because then, this would be against privacy. Law abiding citizens have a right to privacy.
>internet censorship is okay because it's against views I don't agree with
Tea Party = ISIS
AEI = ISIS
Stormfront = ISIS
ALF = ISIS
The consequence of the view that you are implying is that ISIS is just your run of the mill opinioniated organization with slightly questionable political influence. When in fact it is a mass murdering group intent on taking away everyone's freedom. Not to mention that they literally kill people in the most horrific ways that they can imagine.
In your attempt to get me to see why I'm wrong, you will even stoop to trying to convince me that ISIS is not all that bad.
>>55498832
>>55499018
Certainly not bad enough to justify blocking their websites that they can use to recruit devoted religious youth as young as 14 or 16 into not only anti-women, anti-gay, anti-freedom views, but potentially murderous activity.
>>55498832
>I'd love to see how you react if Trump does get his way
What are you even talking about. What is Trump's way? Hm?
>then in a few year[s] the Democrats regain the presidency and you're in the crosshairs.
I'm black. I see no foreseeable future in which the Democrats regain the public's trust after Summer 2k16.
>Remember events don't occur in a vacuum.
>Precedents are set and you will have no control over what future cases they will be applied in.
I don't see where you were going with this.
>>55496830
>Nike stuffing fitbit tech into sneakers
that already exists, Nike+
>>55499018
>Since you refuse to stick to specific cases and insist on generalizing
Because specific cases set precedents which will be used in other cases whether you like it or not. It doesn't matter what you're opinion on general cases is, the moment there is a case where people make an exception a precedent can be set that the government will use in every other case possible.
>The consequence of the view that you are implying is that ISIS is just your run of the mill opinioniated organization with slightly questionable political influence. When in fact it is a mass murdering group intent on taking away everyone's freedom. Not to mention that they literally kill people in the most horrific ways that they can imagine.
So how do you write a law that gives the government the ability to censor those websites that and will never be misused? You're playing with fire giving the government the ability to do that.
>>55497218
>honest about Islamic terrorism
Give me a fucking break, this is just racism in a different guise and you are supporting a racist.
>stupid to support Hillary
Why? Because of the 'email scandal' that basically mirrors the cybersecurity of every federal personality and organization ever?
Because of Benghazi where the risks were obvious and where our people were volunteers for this dangerous job?
>>55496670
Good thing it all charges wirelessly using Tesla technology.
>>55496670
MAGIC LEAP REEEEEE
>>55500463
Because of the constant lying, flip-flopping, and manipulation she has been flagrantly prolapsing this entire election.
Why did she have to lie about everything? Why couldn't she just acknowledge how she, at one point, agreed with the sentiment of building a wall, and denounced gay marriage? Oh, i'm sorry, her having a puffy vulva negates that.
"She will say anything, and do nothing" - Barack Obama
It is, of course, a work of fiction but Black Mirror might have some insights on what could happen in the next 25 years:
Every input received by the brain recorded and with the possibility of being replayed at will.
>>55499212
>Because specific cases set precedents which will be used in other cases whether you like it or not.
Sure. But there is no guarantee that a specific case will grant the government jurisdiction in a future case where they would infringe upon the rights of citizens, or do something unjust. To be more concrete, if Trump implemented a US wide block on all websites owned and operated by ISIS—or rather tried to implement, as the act would likely have to go through congress first to be approved, which I don't see as unlikely considering that they have allowed the Obama administration to bomb so much shit in the name of stopping ISIS—considering that Trump would be asking congress for a block of ISIS websites, on the grounds of their being a clearly terrorist organization, then surely he is setting a precedent for blocking terrorist websites in the future if he gets his way. It doesn't give him precedent to block, say, Wikileaks, which could happen if he said it was in the name of "national security". But again, congress, the legislative branch, acts as a check to possible executive overreach. Whereas we as Americans unanimously hate ISIS, we are far more divided on the topic of whistleblowing and transparency.
There's no guarantee that Trump wouldn't try to overstep the bounds here, but there's neither guarantee that he would nor that he would be successful.
>>55500463
I'm not the first responder to this post.
I echo their point about Hillary's dishonesty, though. But it goes much further than that. Have you seen the picture where she is shaking hands with Osama Bin Laden? Do you know how much she charges in speaking fees? To what extent her party members and campaign sabotaged Sanders' campaign? Do you know how major companies like Google and Facebook and the New York Times are actively and ardently shilling for Hillary, as well as the President himself even despite her being found to have broken the law—the same president who has yet to pardon Snowden or the other leakers and never fired James Clapper for lying to congress? Even if we cannot accuse Hillary of wrongdoing with the available evidence, we can conclude that she is not trustworthy, and that something very sinister is surrounding her campaign. How much of her campaign promises do you believe she is going to follow through on if she wins? What's stopping her from being another Obama—weak on climate change, tough on privacy, lackluster on race relations, and non-averse to war?
As I said earliest, I am more anti-Hillary than I am pro-Trump. I can't say Trump won't turn out bad either, but he has shown more genuine concern for the country and what's best for it than she has. I get the feeling she will be beholden to special interests and that things will get increasingly terrible under her as time goes on.
>Give me a fucking break, this is just racism in a different guise and you are supporting a racist.
The Islam is a race meme. The moderate muslim meme. The open borders meme. Et cetera et cetera.
>>55496670
25 years from 2025 or from 2016?
>>55498548
That's all fine. Will it have USB connectivity though?
>>55503878
>USB 6.0
