What's the future about?

Friends ask me questions about the futures work, and this I think, will form the backbone of my responses:

The future is neither a complete mystery nor a pre-destined. The weather is one example of this. The physics of fluid mechanics is well known; we know very well the basic equations of how moving air and water behaves. Even in the supposedly deterministic, Newtonian-universe, there’s room for surprises. Slight variations in initial conditions can lead to divergent outcomes with time.

People have agency, although that agency is also constrained by time and circumstances. Karl Marx wrote, “Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past.” We live between constraints and freedom.

The story of life itself is another such example. Despite the abiotic conditions, life begets life. Whole ecologies are created. Despite the constraints of chemistry and physics, the wonders of life present a testament to the powers of creation and possibility. Despite the constraints around us, we still can create microcosms of opportunity. They are endless, and as far as we can tell, infinite.

Singapore is an example of constraint and freedom. We face fundamental constraints of a limited space. We also don’t have the privilege of a rich historical tradition. Yet, we have created for ourselves microcosms of opportunities in the world and for ourselves.

We are an audacious dream made real. What we’ve given to the world is an inspiration, for countries and their leaders to think about how to move their people from poverty to prosperity. The world learns with us how to deal with constraints and diversity and live abundantly in a world of multiple cultures, and act against radicalism.

We have to continue to dream audaciously, rooted in reality. A gaze only to the future is daydreaming and futile. Our rootedness will allow us to work towards those dreams.

Every now and then we ought to close our eyes and dream a little, and then to wake up and work towards them.

 

Thoughts on the quarter-century

"My peers and I come from a time of great changes, whether we realize it or not. I was born in 1987 on the day a stock market correction. I vaguely remember the first Gulf War. And then the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997. The panic over the Y2K bug and anxieties about a new millennium. 9-11, the War on Terror, the dot-com bubbles and bust, SARS. More bombings. The rise of China, then BRICS then all sorts of emerging nations in elaborate acronyms. And then of course, the still-unraveling economic crises. Where our parents talked of the Soviet Union, we talk about Russia. Where Communism was real, but only theory for us. Where “tag” and “poke” meant physical things, not mouse-clicks. That we now hold in our hand computers more powerful than the ones that went to the moon. In Singapore, we once feared too many children, but now fear too few. Where we now allow casinos where once they were taboo. We now have the flourishing of the arts, where nature now does not always give way to development. These developments have led to all sorts of changes in the society, where the social and cognitive fabrics are being rewoven on very different terms. We don’t know what the new rules are, and there is no final pattern to refer to. Those graduating in recent years have had to deal with the character of disruptive change ever since university days and before. And increasingly, even more so in the years to come. Change – amplified and deepening is the norm now more so than ever before. My peers have dealt with them. The skillsets, visions and stories we have are the result of having to deal with this very essence of deep and intense change. To those surfing on the waves of these changes, disruptive change is not something “major”. Disruptive change is “meh”. We live it, embrace it, and move on to the next one, or create it. There was no manual for how to use Facebook or Twitter, or any of those platforms. There were guides, but even these guides could not be sufficient for the explosion of uses for these media. We don’t know the ultimate game that we are playing; the game we play now is the one that keeps on going, and the aim is not to let it stop. We just have to decide what game is it that we are playing in the first place."

100-Year Starship Study Public Symposium

From 29 Sep - 2 Oct, I was at a public symposium in the US.

The conference was called the 100 Year Starship Study Public Symposium. Despite the incredulous-sounding nature of the conference, I was precisely there, hearing from the likes of SETI head Jill Tarter, Long Now Foundation co-founder Steward Brand, numerous sci-fi authors, just to say the least.

The conference's objective was to study the feasibility of an organisation to build the starship - not for the actual starship construction per se, but about the nature of the organisation that would be necessary to build it. I was mainly in the forums that explored the economic, social, ethical and legal consideration; and the religious and philosophy.

There was an ethical consideration of the debate - that the organisation would have to consider seriously the ethical considerations of such a endeavour. Could we leave behind the various forms of discrimination when we build and send people to the starship?

Lessons were shared about the previous starship projects. Voyager 1 was touted as one, and there was discussion about the historical evolution of the project. The length of the Voyager programme had to endure technological and personnel changes, and there has to be constant re-training of the people who are involved in the project. Interest with the public has to be constantly evaluated to gain broad-based support. The public has to identify and participate with the 100 YSS for the project to sustain itself.

Gaming industry and game mechanics could be integrated into 100YSS; 100YSS should also be marketing-led as well. Marketing-led in that 100YSS has to identify key stakeholders and to interact with them to sustain themselves too. Concretizing other suggestions on relatability, Gould suggests that 100YSS become a brand that people can relate to, such as "Starship approved" products. By focusing on Starship as a brand, visibility with the public can be achieved.

The economics on Earth should eventually be sufficient to sustain the construction of the starship, given general economic and population growth trends.

Religious considerations would have to be factored in. The change in the worldviews in the wake of a discovery of other forms of life on other planets would have secondary and tertiary considerations not yet thought about in a sustained fashion. Some religions have engaged with questions of salvations on other worlds and related questions, while other religions seem to have built-in ambivalent responses to the possibility of extra-terrestrial intelligences. And the language with which we discuss the exploration of space - exploitation or learning?

There remains a lot more conceptual space with which to explore the entire 100YSS.

Thinking out loud: Politics, networks, organisations

Was thinking that the network effects mentioned by Ronfeldt might signal the end of the mass political party in its current form.

Another train of thought: collective intelligence is also about intelligent social organisations/institutions. 

Placeholders for future elaborations (hopefully).

A future of ageing (among many others)

Setting the context:

I saw old people boarding a bus after visiting the wet market. Presumably it was a trip organised by some RC. I also know that RCs organise trips for usually the elderly to the veg farms in Lim Chu Kang, so all of these isn't new.

What's new however, is the intensification of the ageing demographic in Singapore. This will stretch the caregiving capacity of the individual families, and the state, and maybe the retirement homes. 

I do know that cognitive enhancing drugs already exist, what is uncertain is when these drugs will be widely available. 

I also know that medical sensors could soon be widely available and at an affordable price. I think this will be hugely important and could create a new market for healthcare and monitoring - you guys remember the Microsoft videos on the future of healthcare?

I also recognise the problem of mobility - how will the elderly move about in the community they are likely to live in - not that all of the elderly will end up in retirement homes.

The opportunity:

Managing aging-in-place will need the combination of both the technology and the local social networks to allow the elderly to age with dignity. Community leaders/private providers could be place-specific, getting to know the local community, and to investigate the health conditions of the elderly using the healthcare applications that we've seen in the video.

The elderly will also need to move around - mobility and cognitive impairment could converge to form prickly issues. Hence I propose the need for a elderly ombudsman - someone whose job will be to oversee the activities of the elderly in collaboration with the community. Along with sensors, the ombudsman would be able to know the health conditions of the elderly in the area. Mobility - how about a modified electric golf cart with seats/spaces for the wheelchair-bound to take them around the community, driven by that ombudsman? 

The alternative solution would be the next-gen of exoskeleton, but given that the shape of the first-gen exoskels are not available, I'm not too sure about that.

Although the future will always be to some extent techno-centric, the social element of community life will always persist. Technology will have to be harnessed, although in what form - will be an open question. 

If we play this well, we could find ourselves operationalising the solutions to the wicked problem of aging.