When the very first cars were built, only the rich could afford it, but now a large part of the population (in developed countries) has one or more.

What do you think will be such an evolution in the future?

  • sorebuttfromsitting@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    80
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    better to ask, what can the average family afford now, but it won’t be so accessible in the future?

    water.

    (where i am now, water costs money but is still doable)

    • taladar@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      58
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      The average person will always be able to afford water because if they can’t they will soon cease to be a person. Watch out for statistical effects like that because they might mask the true horror of the situation.

      • Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        1 year ago

        That line, “Cease to be a person,” both applies to the sentiment of, “they won’t live long,” and, “when backed into a corner you see what someone can truly be.”

        Wars fought over drinkable water is not some far off fantasy but very well could (and likely will) become reality for many people.

        The future for our little mud ball drifting through space suspended on a sun beam is looking pretty damn bleak.

  • iamthewalrus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Lab-grown meat.

    “In 2013, the world’s first cultivated meat burger was served at a news conference in London. It allegedly cost $330,000 to make. That figure has plummeted in the almost-decade since, but cell-grown proteins are yet to clock in anywhere close to the same price as conventional meats.” (Source: https://www.bonappetit.com/story/lab-grown-meat)

    The goal is to get the price down to a level the average supermarket shopper can afford, and if the science is successful it has the potential to revolutionize the food chain.

      • weew@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m already fairly satisfied with the newer plant-based meat replacements. They just need to come down in price to below actual meat.

        • Dubious_Fart@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not everyone can eat them though, for whatever reason it can cause extreme abdominal pain, diarrhea, nausea/vomiting, and more in some people.

          I know, because I’m one of those people. Took 3 impossible burgers before I noticed the pattern and looked into it.

          Felt like I was dying the first two times, felt like I was dying the third time too… but that was mollified slightly by recognizing the pattern and hating myself for doing it to myself.

      • bitsplease@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Totally agree - from an ideological standpoint I totally agree with Vegans/Vegetarians on the fact that meat produces unnecessary suffering and (more directly important to us humans) huge amounts of greenhouse gases and wasted calories. But from a practical standpoint I’ve just never been able to convince myself to make such a huge change to my diet - but lab grown meat is literally having your cake and eating it too in that regard.

        Hell I’d happilly pay 2x for a cut of meat that was lab grown instead of coming from an animal - and imagine how amazing you could make - for instance - a steak when you have 100% control over it’s fat/muscle distribution/ratio. Making a Wagyu steak, vs a typical cut would be as simple as tweaking some settings

      • cooopsspace@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        All I can think of is capitalism filling it with shit.

        Why make 50 beef burgers when I can add filler ingredients and make 100.

        Capitalism breaks everything.

        • Dubious_Fart@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I add fillers at home when I make burgers.

          Often times its just panko. Gets an extra burger or two out of the meat, and no one has ever noticed the difference. Still fantastic, juicy hamburgers.

    • richieadler@lemmy.myserv.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I don’t see it happening outside a reduced group of rich countries. They will probably license the method for a very high and unaffordable price.

      • iamthewalrus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m inclined to agree, at least initially. I suspect it’ll depend on how much demand and competition there is in the field once it’s democratized. The other consideration is extraneous factors (e.g. soaring price of meat due to climate change) that could make lab-grown the cheapest/best option eventually.

      • bitsplease@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Would licensing matter outside of rich countries? I confess I know very little about patent law and things like that, but I’d imagine that if - say - Thailand wanted to use the same method as the U.S. Company, that the U.S. company wouldn’t actually be able to do anything about it, since they’re not under the same jurisdiction

          • bitsplease@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I know that, I also know that it has a relatively narrow scope, participation is by treaty and varies wildly from country to country, and often isn’t enforced well. Hence my comment

      • Dubious_Fart@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Don’t worry, I’m sure Corpos and the RIch will find a way to get government to eminent domain your property away and give it to them under some bullshit excuse like “protecting their investment in seaside property”

    • thank_me_its_friday@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Actually as the tide rises those properties will get less. They will just be bought up again from the rich people and the poor will move to the countryside.

  • atlasraven31@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Grow an organ for you from your own cells. No rejection or drugs; your body accepts it as its own.

  • KaiReeve@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Free time.

    As more and larger industries become automated we will have all the free time we can handle. What we do as a society today will determine whether that free time is spent pursuing our personal interests, or fighting over the last scraps of a dying planet.

    • bitsplease@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      42
      ·
      1 year ago

      I wish this were true, but frankly I don’t buy it. In the last 50 years, thanks to automation and technology - productivity has nearly doubled, and yet people have to work more than ever to make ends meet or buy a home. Automation just means that the ultra rich can produce more with the same workforce. The global economy is built on the idea that GDP has to be constantly growing, and the more growth the better. Why let perfectly good workers sit idle when they could be making you more money?

      Some industries get fully (or mostly) automated, sure and jobs dissapear from those industries, but new ones always pop up so that the folks at the top can continue profiting off the labor of those at the bottom. You think all the folks who used to have job titles like “Calculator” just retired at the age of 30 and enjoyed not having to work anymore? Nah, they were just forced to take new (often shittier, lower paying) jobs.

    • teamevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      We have been hearing that for 35 years… production has gone up exponentially whilst labor requirements dropped yet we work more and longer than ever.

  • haych@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    If electric cars follow this path and aren’t replaced with something else like enviro-friendly fuels, electric cars.

    I don’t have an electric car, I dislike how many artificially limit things like speed, it shouldn’t be a paid upgrade if the hardware is capable, the amount of tracking worries me too, like Tesla staff could see through your cabin cameras.

    I’d rather have environment friendly fuels that work with older cars, even if that requires a new ECU+Fuel pump.

    • fresh@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Outside of the US and Canada, electric bikes look to be the future instead of mainly electric cars. E-bikes are not just massively more environmentally friendly, they’re also radically reshaping city design to be more livable. I hope the future isn’t just a different kind of car. I hope, for the sake of the environment and society, it’s a world with fewer cars.

      • theshatterstone54@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        But what about rural areas and long term travel? My dad, for example, has to travel about 80 miles in each direction every day to get to and from work. How long would it take him to get there with an E-bike?

        • fresh@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          This is why I said fewer cars, not no cars. Most people obviously do not drive 160 miles a day. With better infrastructure and public transportation, a 2 car family might go down to 1 car, or replace half of their car trips with other modalities, etc.

    • Walk_blesseD@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not unless they come up with some new kind of battery tech. There’s simply not enough lithium for a global mass adoption of personal electric cars.

      • Stovetop@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I wouldn’t worry so much about that. I mean, I am sure battery tech will improve because companies will want to sell the car with the longest range, but in terms of lithium supplies, it is not scarce and it is recyclable.

        • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You’re wrong.

          There’s about 1.446 billion cars in use on earth and 26 million tons of global lithium reserves. Even if we immediately extracted all that and divided it between all the cars that gives each car about 34 pounds of lithium.

          A Tesla, relatively small and lightweight for a car, has 138 pounds of lithium in its battery.

          So there’s enough lithium in the whole world for a little under one quarter of the cars we have now if they were all tiny little sports coupes.

          Nothing for busses, ships, trains, trams, bikes, mobile phones, computers, power tools, appliances, grid storage, home generators, the list goes on.

    • bitsplease@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      it’s worth noting (not that this makes it better) - that artificially removing features isn’t a new thing with electric cars.

      It’s always been cheaper to build only the more expensive version of something, then artificially cripple it for the cheaper version. CPUs are a good example - most CPUs of a given series are basically the same hardware, it’s just that the cheaper versions will be down-clocked, or have some cores deliberately disabled.

      Before the tech existed to have heated seats be a subscription service, cars that were sold without that option, would often have the heating hardware still installed in the seats, it just wouldn’t be hooked up. Hell, sometimes literally the only difference between the model with heated seats and without was whether they installed the button to turn them on

      • Longpork_afficianado@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        This statement about cpus isn’t entirely correct. In the manufacture of precision electronics, there is always a reasonable chance of defects occurring, so what happens is that all the parts are built to the same spec, then they are “binned” according to their level of defects.

        You produce a hundred 24 core cpus, then you test them rigorously. You discover that 30 work perfectly and sell them as the 24 core mdoel. 30 have between one and eight defective cores, so you block access to those cores and sell them as the 16 core model. Rinse and repeat until you reach the minimum number of cores for a saleable cpu.

        This is almost certainly not the case in car manufacturing, as while you could sell a car with defective seat heaters at a lower price point, what actually occurs is that cars with perfectly functional seat heaters have that feature disabled until you pay extra for it.

    • illi@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Afaik there are such fuels, but are much more expensive. From what I read it could shift and rich will be able to ride vehicless with combustion engines using eco fuel, while us plebs will drive electric

      • TheWeirdestCunt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        It costs about £1.80 per litre to make your own bio diesel in the uk at the moment using supermarket vegetable oil (or even less if you bulk buy) so I don’t see eco fuels being so expensive that it’s unaffordable to anyone who can already afford a car.

        • illi@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not an expert, I just said what I heard. But how many people would be able to make fuel at home and be confident enough to pour it in their tank? I imagine there would also need to be some regulations on this.

          Buy again - not an expert.

    • vagrantprodigy@lemmy.whynotdrs.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not all EVs are crazy expensive. Some of them are basically at price parity with what a gas version of the same vehicle would cost now.

    • bstix@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s already past the point where only rich people have them. It’s currently one of those things where it’s actually more expensive to be poor.

      I bought an EV because it’s cheaper over a few years than getting the cheapest gasoline beater car. It’s a bigger cost up front, but the total cost is smaller over few years.

      If anything, only rich people will be able to afford keeping the gasoline cars. Similarly to todays vintage lead fueled classics.

      • haych@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t know where you are, but in Europe it’s much cheaper to buy a used Gasoline car. I just got a 1L petrol car for the equivalent of $10k, I can’t find a good electric car for anywhere close to that.

        • bstix@feddit.dk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I am in Europe. You have to look past the purchase price.

          What I did was to compare the price of buying €3k beater cars throughout the next ten years versus getting an only slightly used EV for €21k that I expect to drive for the same period.

          The purchase price is 7 times higher, yes, but the savings on fuel, taxes and financing makes up for it it less than 6 years in my case.

          So in short, I had a pretty easy choice in getting an almost new EV instead of continuing buying and repairing scrap cars as I’d previously done for the same reasons.

          • haych@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            My car tax (VED) is £20 a year, Vs £0 on electric. Fuel and the extra £20 tax a year doesn’t equate to the cost of an EV just yet.

            EVs are definitely still a luxury, poor people aren’t going round with EVs.

        • kloppix@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Hello, fellow European. The starting price of electric cars is definitely the biggest issue (and there isn’t a sizable second-hand market yet).

          If you want to spend even less find out if you can convert your car to LPG. I have been driving with LPG for about 2 years and I couldn’t be more satisfied.

          According to the german Ministry for Economic Affairs and Climate Protection, there is not much difference in operating costs between an electric vehicle and a CNG/LPG vehicle. Source: PDF from June 2023

          But this does not take into account the price of the vehicle as such. In this case, lpg is much cheaper.

        • Xanvial@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well that’s also what they said, electric cars have expensive upfront cost, but in the long run it’s cheaper (gas vs electric cost

  • Barbacamanitu@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    No. The divide between the rich and everyone else is growing. We will be able to afford less and less.

    • Aux@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      While the divide is growing, things are getting more and more affordable and even the poorest in developed countries today live better lives than kings two centuries ago.

      • BaumGeist@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        That is a very vague measure. Their health is better? They have more stuff? They have technology that didn’t exist back then? They live longer?

        Or are they more fulfilled? Do they have more of their psychological needs met? They’re happier?

      • Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        10 years ago even the president of the united states couldn’t have gotten their hands on a device equivalent to todays smartphones. Today even the billionaires can’t buy a better device than what the middle class has.

        • milo128@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          in my opinion you shouldn’t guage quality of life by how advanced the devices we have are. i dont feel like having a high-tech smartphone provides me much happiness, it’s just a necessity for participating in modern society.

  • Salamander@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Full genome sequencing.

    The price of sequencing continues to decrease as the technology evolves. I have already seen claims of under $1,000 for a full human genome. I haven’t looked carefully into those claims, but I think we are around there. In some years full genomes will be so cheap to sequence that it will be routine. I want to buy one of those small Oxford Nanopore MinION sequencers in the future. I’ll use it like a pokedex.

          • Salamander@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            There is a theoretical future in which full-genome sequencing is performed exclusively by large companies, hospitals, and governments, and the data is stored by them and they can access it.

            But the technologies are becoming quite accessible. Unless regulations are introduced to force people to give up their genetic data, which I don’t think is so likely, there will be ways for us to get our sequences without the sequences being stored by a third party. I also think that there will be FOSS tools for us to run our own analyses.

    • crr10@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I got a used Motorola Razr 5G in perfect condition to use as a work phone for about $300 on eBay. Had it for about a year now and I absolutely love it. Definitely not just for the rich.

      • titaalik@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        May I ask why? I would be scared 24/7 to break my phone with my fingernails or something because the screens are so fragile.

        • bitsplease@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I have one so maybe I can elaborate on the benefits

          For one, they’re really not that fragile. I’ve dropped my Fold a shitload of times now, and it has 0 issues. That’s not to say people don’t have issues with them (ala black bar of doom), but they’re not as prevalent as you might think, for the usual reason that you’re always going to hear more about the fail cases than the people who just buy the phone, and have it work fine.

          As for the “why do you want one” - it’s basically like having a phone and tablet in one, and all in a form factor that is basically as compact as your typical smart phone (a bit thicker ofc, but still perfectly reasonable to carry every day). When I’m just doing “basic smartphone stuff” like texting, checking emails, etc - I just use the small screen and it works just like any other phone, but when I’m browsing social media, watching TV/Movies, or playing games - it’s absolutely awesome. I have an MG-X Pro that i use with mine, and streaming games from my PC feels like playing on a steam deck, it’s also an amazing emulation device thanks to the big screen.

          I can definitely see why some people wouldn’t want one, but personally, I can’t see myself ever going back to a “flat” phone

        • AnonymousLlama@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Be super keen for foldable devices overall. I just can’t get past the huge obvious fold in the middle of the screen. It’s gotten better but I’m hoping eventually it evolves to the point where it’s seamless. Being able to pull out a phone and then unfold it to get a tablet UI would be super handy for articles

      • worfamerryman@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Once the crease is gone in the middle…

        Once the price drops, I’d love to have a phone that unfolds into a tablet, and can then be docked to a monitor and run a full desktop OS.

        All that tech is here with the galaxy flip, but the desktop OS, I’ve read is still lacking.

  • Instigate@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    If the news about LK-99 has any element of truth to it, then superconductor-based technologies and maglev transport will become much more affordable in the future.