Comments on: Futurepedia http://blog.longnow.org/2008/01/28/futurepedia/ The Official Weblog of The Long Now Foundation and Friends Sun, 23 Nov 2008 20:22:49 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.3 By: C http://blog.longnow.org/2008/01/28/futurepedia/#comment-3418 C Mon, 04 Feb 2008 17:45:17 +0000 http://blog.longnow.org/2008/01/28/futurepedia/#comment-3418 It may be difficult to use Wikipedia as an archive for future predictions, as their guidelines require verifiability and attribution, and one of the entries on "What Wikipedia is not" is "Wikipedia is not a crystal ball". While it may be possible to provide citations about who predicted what scenario, the events themselves cannot possibly be verifiable in the way that they mean, and I predict that such entries will be removed from the future years entries. ;) There is an interesting small wiki which is trying to look into the future, however. Check out http://future.wikia.com/ and examine some of the scenarios they've built -- they'd welcome more information from current thinkers in the field, and I think it would be a perfect place to build a "timeline of future events" and other new articles. The community is fairly small at the moment -- a few strong contributors from among the readers of this blog could add significant depth and form to the wiki by working harmoniously with the existing membership. Consider yourself invited! It may be difficult to use Wikipedia as an archive for future predictions, as their guidelines require verifiability and attribution, and one of the entries on “What Wikipedia is not” is “Wikipedia is not a crystal ball”. While it may be possible to provide citations about who predicted what scenario, the events themselves cannot possibly be verifiable in the way that they mean, and I predict that such entries will be removed from the future years entries. ;)

There is an interesting small wiki which is trying to look into the future, however. Check out http://future.wikia.com/ and examine some of the scenarios they’ve built — they’d welcome more information from current thinkers in the field, and I think it would be a perfect place to build a “timeline of future events” and other new articles. The community is fairly small at the moment — a few strong contributors from among the readers of this blog could add significant depth and form to the wiki by working harmoniously with the existing membership. Consider yourself invited!

]]> By: lillian http://blog.longnow.org/2008/01/28/futurepedia/#comment-3358 lillian Fri, 01 Feb 2008 06:10:27 +0000 http://blog.longnow.org/2008/01/28/futurepedia/#comment-3358 Interestingly I just ran across what might be considered the reverse of this. In Robert Penn Warren's novel "All the King's Men" one of the characters makes a joking comment about the the year 2050, which is rendered in the text as "twenty-hundred and fifty." I had to read that line a few times before it registered. Also, RE: Todd and the article in general, I rarely hear people in California using more than decade/year when speaking; meaning, '03 or '97 or '85. 2000 is usually "two thousand", rarely Y2K (ugh) and never "double ought." However, future dates beyond '09 are typically "twenty X" as suggested by the article. Oh, and John H. gets +1 for the Zager and Evans reference. Interestingly I just ran across what might be considered the reverse of this. In Robert Penn Warren’s novel “All the King’s Men” one of the characters makes a joking comment about the the year 2050, which is rendered in the text as “twenty-hundred and fifty.”

I had to read that line a few times before it registered.

Also, RE: Todd and the article in general, I rarely hear people in California using more than decade/year when speaking; meaning, ‘03 or ‘97 or ‘85. 2000 is usually “two thousand”, rarely Y2K (ugh) and never “double ought.”

However, future dates beyond ‘09 are typically “twenty X” as suggested by the article.

Oh, and John H. gets +1 for the Zager and Evans reference.

]]> By: Todd http://blog.longnow.org/2008/01/28/futurepedia/#comment-3353 Todd Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:29:34 +0000 http://blog.longnow.org/2008/01/28/futurepedia/#comment-3353 Pronunciation: perhaps oddly, virtually everyone I know already says (e.g.) "twenty-oh-eight" -- there seemed some uncertainty in 2001/2002, but by 2003 it seemed universal. On the other hand perhaps it's just regional (Victoria BC) or maybe I only know oddballs. Pronunciation: perhaps oddly, virtually everyone I know already says (e.g.) “twenty-oh-eight” — there seemed some uncertainty in 2001/2002, but by 2003 it seemed universal. On the other hand perhaps it’s just regional (Victoria BC) or maybe I only know oddballs.

]]> By: John H http://blog.longnow.org/2008/01/28/futurepedia/#comment-3349 John H Tue, 29 Jan 2008 06:45:00 +0000 http://blog.longnow.org/2008/01/28/futurepedia/#comment-3349 It seems likely that this shift in phrasing will take place by the year 2525 (if man is still alive). It seems likely that this shift in phrasing will take place by the year 2525 (if man is still alive).

]]>