News & Analysis
Opinion: A graduate-entrepreneur looks forward 40 years
Simon Barker, Chief Technology Officer, Radfan
12/5/2012 10:07 AM EST
Students opine.
EE Times asked four students and young people what they think technology could do for their world over the next 40 years and what they would like it to achieve. Here's what they said:
Click on image to enlarge.
"The influence of China will be massive. Britain is going to have to re-invent self. I guess I am a little bit pessimistic. Technology-wise: hover cars like in [the film] Back to the future. That needs to happen. As the technology makes things cheaper they keep inventing new things for us to NEED. You can't escape from it. Either we will make some progress on renewable energy or abandon it. Nuclear energy is the only real alternative to fossil fuels."
Click on image to enlarge.
"What I hope for; a teleportation machine. In 40 years we will have found life on another planet but fossil fuels will have run out. I suppose we will use nuclear energy. Every job will be based on the computer but maybe we can have a lot more free time. I hope we don't have a nuclear war.
We will have computers that can predict the future, but computers will never be equal to human beings.
Click on image to enlarge.
Fay Farstad, studying environmental policy at Lucy Cavendish College, Cambridge
I hope technology takes a step back. Some things that technology produces have been bad for the planet – like asbestos and thalidomide. There is a drive among technologists that whatever can be done will be done, and that's not always good. In the next 40 years we need to hold back and realize the effects things can have. Think about the way we produce products. Even Apple, one of the largest companies in the world is using workers in China and questionable practices.
Cars will be electric and there will be solar panels everywhere. Airplanes will run on biofuel. There will be computers everywhere. There will be no hand-writing. But we need more robotics to help with healthcare. We need medical support before we get ill. They can already make a mechanical heart. So maybe they will replace organs before they fail and we will live longer; like 150 years.
Click on image to enlarge.
I hope computers will become easier to use. For my studies I can already access 20 million historical entries with a click of a button. That would have been unthinkable 30 years ago. I want the global database to be more comprehensive, even easier to search. I am not worried about computers being more intelligent than humans.
I study the industrial revolution. Many revolutions come about because of the availability of new energy sources. You can argue that fossil fuel era [coal and oil] came about as a replacement for wood. So I suppose nuclear power must replace fossil fuel. But I heard that even nuclear energy could run out.
People are always afraid of mortality so technology could help there. I would like to live for 200 years.
EE Times asked four students and young people what they think technology could do for their world over the next 40 years and what they would like it to achieve. Here's what they said:
Click on image to enlarge.
Freddie Brown, music graduate from St. Catherine's College, Cambridge
now teaching in the university.
now teaching in the university.
"The influence of China will be massive. Britain is going to have to re-invent self. I guess I am a little bit pessimistic. Technology-wise: hover cars like in [the film] Back to the future. That needs to happen. As the technology makes things cheaper they keep inventing new things for us to NEED. You can't escape from it. Either we will make some progress on renewable energy or abandon it. Nuclear energy is the only real alternative to fossil fuels."
Click on image to enlarge.
Simon Heffels, high school student from Hilversum, The Netherlands
"What I hope for; a teleportation machine. In 40 years we will have found life on another planet but fossil fuels will have run out. I suppose we will use nuclear energy. Every job will be based on the computer but maybe we can have a lot more free time. I hope we don't have a nuclear war.
We will have computers that can predict the future, but computers will never be equal to human beings.
Click on image to enlarge.
Fay Farstad, studying environmental policy at Lucy Cavendish College, Cambridge
I hope technology takes a step back. Some things that technology produces have been bad for the planet – like asbestos and thalidomide. There is a drive among technologists that whatever can be done will be done, and that's not always good. In the next 40 years we need to hold back and realize the effects things can have. Think about the way we produce products. Even Apple, one of the largest companies in the world is using workers in China and questionable practices.
Cars will be electric and there will be solar panels everywhere. Airplanes will run on biofuel. There will be computers everywhere. There will be no hand-writing. But we need more robotics to help with healthcare. We need medical support before we get ill. They can already make a mechanical heart. So maybe they will replace organs before they fail and we will live longer; like 150 years.
Click on image to enlarge.
Born in Qing Dao, China, Xue Sheng is studying for a history PhD
at Wolfson College, Cambridge
at Wolfson College, Cambridge
I hope computers will become easier to use. For my studies I can already access 20 million historical entries with a click of a button. That would have been unthinkable 30 years ago. I want the global database to be more comprehensive, even easier to search. I am not worried about computers being more intelligent than humans.
I study the industrial revolution. Many revolutions come about because of the availability of new energy sources. You can argue that fossil fuel era [coal and oil] came about as a replacement for wood. So I suppose nuclear power must replace fossil fuel. But I heard that even nuclear energy could run out.
People are always afraid of mortality so technology could help there. I would like to live for 200 years.
|
|
|
|
|
Navigate to related information
iniewski
12/5/2012 2:11 PM EST
Simon: This is all great...but relies on your wildly optimistic assumption that "fusion saved the human race"...perhaps you should write the opposite text to that: "fusion didn't save us and we are out of water and energy"...Kris
Sign in to Reply