Are we in the future yet?

>>61091714
You're always one second away from the future.

All depends on your point of view, man.

>space elevator in 2030
right

>>61091714
Funny how that thing did not predict low earth orbit data satellites for high speed global internet. Which is currently being worked on by SpaceX and a competing company.

>retinal screens in 2033
Apple is 20 years ahead of the competition

>>61091721
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_oscillation

probably less than that.

>>61091714
>Virtual currencies
>Cyber(meme) warfare
>Machine translation
>Machine vision

WTF

>>61091714
>interplanetary internet
Yeah, sure. Enjoy that 15 minute latency. It would be like the late 90s all over again. No way in hell I'd go to Mars because threads would die before my text only shitpost even went through.

>>61091882
Not sure if bait

>>61091714
When does anime become real?

>>61092187
2025 vr only life forms

>>61091714
>Are we in the future yet?

Yes, but the future is not what it used to be.

>>61092127
kek

>>61091714
kek, this thing reads like one of those iceberg charts with ridiculous shit at the bottom.

>utility fog
>embodied avatars
>VR-only lifeforms

File: eaa60cf431adcbefc44a357ba6af2edda3cc9f51.jpg (30KB, 580x388px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 580x388px

>>61091714
This chart was clearly made by a science enthusiast with no knowledge whatsoever.
Also:
>2019
>750GB standard RAM
If that's for consumers: not gonna happen anytime soon.
If that's for enterprise: it happened about 5 years ago.

This chart can't even forecast accurately 1.5 years ahead

>>61095491
Just realized it was made in 2012.
It's still shit, but slightly less so

>>61095491
>>61095539
THIS is what's bothering you?
not
>graphene
>biofuels
...

>>61095539
>>61095491
>Thorium reactor
>Proven tech from the 60s
>Even the Loos and Chinese are building them
>2030s
Chart is shit