So us of the intarweb generation...

[meglamaniac]

Having tried (unsuccesfully) to explain the concept of MSN Messenger to my parents, I was wondering if we'd all still be using it (or similar Yahoo etc systems) when we're in grey old middle age. I mean, its a pretty handy tool to keep track of all your friends with, and with broadband becomming normal in this country at long last, it makes the audio/audio+video abilities more viable.
Seeing as by the time we're in our 40s/50s I imagine we'll have more bandwidth than we know what to do with, I'm guessing this is only going to get more commonplace.

So what do you reckon? While it's hard to envisage my parents using the thing, will you be throwing the kids off the PC so you can get on MSN in 20 years time?

[Dark-Strider]

mmm MSN Messenger V253

Will mIRC still be around in 50 years.

[Nodrog]

I'd like to think we'd have moved significantly beyond 2D text messaging by the time I'm 40.

[Pyr0 MK III]

I hope cyber sex hasnt progressed

[meglamaniac]

Originally Posted by Nodrog

I'd like to think we'd have moved significantly beyond 2D text messaging by the time I'm 40.

Lots of people say this sort of thing, but what would you actually want over and above text? If what you want is more expression and the ability to convey tone-of-voice and so on then use audio or audiovideo messaging.

[Nodrog]

telepathy.

[wu_trax]

who ever needed more than mail?
who would have imagined that we would have what we have now 40 years ago?
but to anywer your question: id guess once we are all old we will be stuck with what we know and not adjust to new technologies that fast.

[Nodrog]

speak for yourself luddite.

[Deffeh]

everyone in my house will have their own computer, or never touch one. My computer is my computer.

[queball]

I still use my phone. :-/ As wu suggests, we'll probably still have mail and voice and newer things will just improve the interface or appeal to slightly different markets.
MSN's main purpose is for meeting people (new or old), so presumably some kind of integrated calendering system, with at least being able to buy entertainment automatically, dating/meet a friend sites becoming much more popular and integrated. Everything might as well go mobile, so you wouldn't need to sit at your PC (headsets or star trek style thin clients perhaps), though you would probably dedicate some specific time to chatting.

[KaneED]

i hate phones

[MrL_JaKiri]

Are we talking actual computers or just little notepads?

If we are, then we'd need to find a much more efficient way of either making chips/processing information, or cooling them without using the case as a heatsink. Otherwise you're going to get your hand burnt off.

Plus, there is a realistic limitation on the minimum size of extractable media, because fiddly is bad.

[JonnyBGood]

Maybe we can all buy these nifty little chips off big companies and use them to communicate what we're thinking to other people.


Because when a big company does it it's ok but if the government was doing it it'd be STOP INFRINGING ON MY RIGHTS YOU FASCISTS!!!!.






End communication.

[Deepflow]

big companies arent ok duder.

evil globalisation!

[queball]

Originally Posted by MrL_JaKiri

Are we talking actual computers or just little notepads?

If we are, then we'd need to find a much more efficient way of either making chips/processing information, or cooling them without using the case as a heatsink. Otherwise you're going to get your hand burnt off.

A notepad. You don't need much just to display stuff - a low-power ARM chip might power a PDA today with some basic graphics. If it is an issue there are things chipmakers could do (reversible computing?) but I don't see heat being a biggie.

Plus, there is a realistic limitation on the minimum size of extractable media, because fiddly is bad.

Where we're going, we won't need extractable media. At least, I don't see why anyone would need it generally - wireless networking + internet storage is already doable.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by queball

A notepad. You don't need much just to display stuff - a low-power ARM chip might power a PDA today with some basic graphics. If it is an issue there are things chipmakers could do (reversible computing?) but I don't see heat being a biggie.

It was more Flavius's suggestion, which implies a scale or two up the power scale. I actually hadn't thought of RISC chips, but then when has RISC chips being better for something ever helped in the world of PCs?

Originally Posted by queball

Where we're going, we won't need extractable media. At least, I don't see why anyone would need it generally - wireless networking + internet storage is already doable.

Bandwidth will be an issue, as would transmission power. Would we be doing short range stuff like WLANs are at the moment, or more of a mobile phone style arrangement?

That aside, I'm not fond of remote storage. The speeds will always be much less than hard drive (or equiv) access speeds, and at the current point in time the only thing that would really need terabytes of space to store would be extremely badly coded games, assuming there aren't superadvances in film recording tech, which is a pretty big assumption.

[Tactitus]

Originally Posted by Deffeh

everyone in my house will have their own computer, or never touch one. My computer is my computer.

Having one's own personal computer already seems somewhat obsolete to me. I would hope that in the future, computers would become as cheap and as ubiquitous as pencils are today. That is to say, not really worth keeping track of.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by Tactitus

Having one's own personal computer already seems somewhat obsolete to me. I would hope that in the future, computers would become as cheap and as ubiquitous as pencils are today. That is to say, not really worth keeping track of.

I'd have said CD players personally, pencils aren't exactly high tech.

[Belgarath The Sorcerer]

Originally Posted by meglamaniac

While it's hard to envisage my parents using the thing, will you be throwing the kids off the PC so you can get on MSN in 20 years time?

Me and my brother regularly talk to my Mum on msn messenger, although we've given up all hope of getting a conversation out of our father on it. And in 20 years time, everyone will have some sort of PC/PDA type device.

And I agree with Nod, 2-d text messaging in 20 years? Probably only the extremely cheap/lightweight end of the spectrum, more standard stuff will probably be video messaging or something like that.

Eventually we'll all have computers in our head you know.

[NEWSBOT3]

we already do.

[Marilyn Manson]

Most people will live on The Moon in fourty year's time. Or at least, I hope they will.

[Tactitus]

Originally Posted by MrL_JaKiri

I'd have said CD players personally, pencils aren't exactly high tech.

That's kind of the whole point. Today's high tech = tomorrow's low tech.

[Structural Integrity]

Originally Posted by Nodrog

I'd like to think we'd have moved significantly beyond 2D text messaging by the time I'm 40.

I doubt this would be used widely.
I don't think people would have their webcam on all the time and just "hang" in a "chatroom". Or some VR stuff.
Because, people seek refuge to the internet for the anonymity and the ability to just "cut off" when they like. Any virtual reality or constant video streaming would take that away. Atleast I know I love the ability to just stop "talking" to someone on MSN when I'm not interested anymore. Heck, for what they know I might have gone away.
What I think will become very popular is video conferencing. But not with strangers but with groups of friends. Increased bandwidth will make this possible.

I like to see the future internet as an advanced communication medium and not a substitute for real life, like VR would make it.

[Dante Hicks]

I think there'll be a desire for some speech/video applications in chat (as there is now) but it wouldn't be the primary use of instant messaging. I've had conversations on IRC/MSN with several different people, for hours. A spoken conversation at that intensity would have been physically exhausting. The "split-attention" syndrome in current instant messaging seems to be something difficult to simulate with voice / video chat too.

To echo Nod's earlier point, it's pretty easy to imagine some kind of a neural link with a terminal which means you could "type" through thoughts, which would get rid of the need for actually being in front of a box to "chat". Obviously this all depends on how easy it is to interface with the human brain, but I'm presuming it won't be that hard for humanity in 20/30 years (assuming we've not suffered some major tech setback). Getting a message in this sort of context would be like a text message. I "hear" a beep, and get a neural feed from a friend saying "hi", etc. There are various positive/negative aspects to all this obviously (lol, spam).

I'd also agree with Tact. As time goes on, having my own PC is less and less important. At work already, irrespective of which computer I log into I get the same background/settings/files/etc. If I log into Trillian or MSN from University I get my contact list up (and I can access saved files via a web interface if I care). It's pretty easy to imagine a situation where having a "computer" is somewhat akin to having a plug-socket in a home. Everyone has several, but for the users purposes they're all pretty much the same.

[meglamaniac]

Originally Posted by MrL_JaKiri

Are we talking actual computers or just little notepads?

If we are, then we'd need to find a much more efficient way of either making chips/processing information, or cooling them without using the case as a heatsink. Otherwise you're going to get your hand burnt off.

Plus, there is a realistic limitation on the minimum size of extractable media, because fiddly is bad.

There already is a design process can produce "standard" (ie. x86 compatible) chips which use around 1/4 of the power - and therefore dissipate a lot less heat - of thier current equivilant speed AMD/Intel chip.
The reason it isn't used is that currently there's no computer algorithm that can design iterative generations like todays chips are - so people have to do the designing instead, hence they'd be incredibly expensive.

Unfortunately I can't remember what the hell this is called right now.

[queball]

Originally Posted by Structural Integrity

I doubt this would be used widely.
I don't think people would have their webcam on all the time and just "hang" in a "chatroom". Or some VR stuff.
Because, people seek refuge to the internet for the anonymity and the ability to just "cut off" when they like. Any virtual reality or constant video streaming would take that away. Atleast I know I love the ability to just stop "talking" to someone on MSN when I'm not interested anymore. Heck, for what they know I might have gone away.

Unfortunately that does decrease the value of chat for the people on the other end. I'm not sure if informal chat could sustain a high level of "white lie" secrecy. If it could, then why not mimicry - my mum just calls me up to ask "are you cold? are you hungry?", so perhaps one day she'd be happy to talk to a virtual agent that answered these properly (and more politely). It wouldn't have to decieve anyone, just be comforting and friendly. Or I could give you access to my calendar, and you could chat with my proxy to find out when I can meet up or have a real chat.
Definitely a market there somewhere, computers could replace secretaries. That's more about user interface than actual chat, but hey.

I like to see the future internet as an advanced communication medium and not a substitute for real life, like VR would make it.

I don't see a sharp difference. Seeing someone on IRC is not hugely different from being in a virtual room with them, to me.

[Nodrog]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

II'd also agree with Tact. As time goes on, having my own PC is less and less important. At work already, irrespective of which computer I log into I get the same background/settings/files/etc. If I log into Trillian or MSN from University I get my contact list up (and I can access saved files via a web interface if I care). It's pretty easy to imagine a situation where having a "computer" is somewhat akin to having a plug-socket in a home. Everyone has several, but for the users purposes they're all pretty much the same.

What we need is some kind of government service where everyone's data is stored in a central location, and then it can be accessed by plugging in to one of the many 'computer plug sockets' around the country. Or perhaps it could be stored in digital chips implanted into the arm or leg.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by Nodrog

What we need is some kind of government service where everyone's data is stored in a central location, and then it can be accessed by plugging in to one of the many 'computer plug sockets' around the country. Or perhaps it could be stored in digital chips implanted into the arm or leg.

I find your ideas intriguing and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

edit : More seriously, I'm thinking of getting rid of my PC and just carrying round a 1GB USB pen drive or something.

[Dead_Meat]

Originally Posted by MrL_JaKiri

Bandwidth will be an issue, as would transmission power. Would we be doing short range stuff like WLANs are at the moment, or more of a mobile phone style arrangement?

Coming to a home near you in the middle of next year
We're right in the middle of that lot and trust me, it'll make 802.11 look like 'tone deaf mutes' night at a karaoke club.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by Tactitus

That's kind of the whole point. Today's high tech = tomorrow's low tech.

Pencils were never high tech though. CD Players WERE high tech, but now they're ubiquitous.

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally Posted by MrL_JaKiri

Pencils were never high tech though.

You're showing your extreme youth there, Mark. Talk to DM sometime.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by Marilyn Manson

You're showing your extreme youth there, Mark. Talk to DM sometime.

It's a stick of carbon (or other compounds) that makes a mark on a piece of paper. You can make charcoal by burning some wood for gods sake.

lol dm's older than prometheus, etc.

[LHC]

Originally Posted by MrL_JaKiri

Pencils were never high tech though. CD Players WERE high tech, but now they're ubiquitous.

I'd be pretty pissed off if I lose my CD player.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by LHC

I'd be pretty pissed off if I lose my CD player.

That's because it's reasonably expensive; there's a minimum amount of cost and expertise which goes into making one (silicon, copper and the rest are a bit more expensive than wood, for instance, and there's a much more complicated manufacturing procedure), just as there would be for PCs vs Pencils, whereas PCs vs CD players is a better comparison, especially as the two technologies might well converge.

[Tactitus]

Originally Posted by MrL_JaKiri

It's a stick of carbon (or other compounds) that makes a mark on a piece of paper. You can make charcoal by burning some wood for gods sake.

Heh.

[meglamaniac]

What a fascinating publication

[JetLinus]

Back to MSN: Get Skype. Smooth talking, using about 4-5kb/s up- and downstream...
Works through almost all router configs etc...