Category: Prediction

Observations, Prediction

The Sick Man of the West?

pollywannamath

The Ottoman Empire’s best days were behind it as World War I broke out in Europe. It remained largely agrarian while Europe mechanized. It lost critical territories through the 1800s. Political thinkers through the 19th century predicted the Ottoman demise. Financially the country was in ruin. By 1873, it could only meet half of its annual debt obligation. Even after a 1908 reform, the military of the Ottoman empire lagged behind its more modern European counterparts, and relied heavily on arms suppliers from other countries (mostly Germany).

The Ottoman decline is not obvious only in retrospect. Ostensibly, Czar Nicholas I described the Ottoman empire as “a sick man” as early as 1853. Cartoonists from the mid-19th century through the end of WWI had a field day with the Ottoman Empire:

. National representations of the Great Powers of Europe, “heal” a subdued Crete, dressed in Turkish garb the ruling power on the island at the time, in the aftermath of the Cretan Uprising in 1898.
Political cartoon referencing French aid to the Church and Ottoman Empire ca. 1860.
1915 satirical publication remarking on the end of the Ottoman Empire.

If a global war were to strike today, would the US be the “sick man”? The US has not proven particularly successful in recent military engagements (even if the cause is not due to limitations in military might). US national debt continues to skyrocket. The US government seems bloated, wayward, and without executive direction.

Certainly though, the US has advantages over the Ottoman empire. The US military is without dispute the most well equipped in the world and in a total war scenario is likely to fare better than most countries globally. But what if the next crisis, the one that exposes the sick man is not war?

If the crisis is humanitarian, climate change, pandemic, or technological, is the United States better off than the Ottoman Empire was at the onset of WWI? I think that is a harder question to answer. The US has been slow to enact policy change, even when the majority of its citizens desire the change. On a global stage US “soft power” appears to be waning, although we may find that US corporations had more “soft power” than any US governmental entity for a long time. With the current level of polarization, distrust in government, and special interest influence, will the US be able to keep up with the thought leaders in the next crisis? Or will we see the comics above–with the US as the sick man of the West?

*Author’s note: A comparison between the Ottoman Empire during WWI and the US will never be accurate. I don’t mean to imply that the US will carry out genocide in its decline, nor do I want to minimize the Armenian genocide by not referencing it in this post. I recommend that all readers familiarize themselves with that terrible period of time.

Prediction, Technology

When will we drive flying cars?

pollywannamath

Since before the Jetsons, we have dreamed of owning a flying car. The idea of leaving your house in the sky and flying to your destination without the humdrum of ground traffic is exciting. We already have helicopters, private drones, and airplanes, why not flying cars too?

In fact, there is a flying car on sale today (well….preorder). It isn’t quite the Jetsons, but it confirms the base technology is possible and not too far away. So when will the average person drive a flying car and will it bring the freedom we hope?

I’m not sure flying cars will ever be in our future. And if flying cars see widespread adoption, I don’t think it will offer a superior product to ground transit. I have a few reasons for my thinking:

  1. There aren’t many helicopter pilots. An ultralight helicopter can cost as little as $20,000 and the range would suffice for daily commutes. Ultralight helicopters are as close as we have to the cars of the Jetsons and are possible for wealthy individuals today. The regulatory limitations of helicopters are much lower than that of airplanes. Getting a private helicopter license is expensive, but can happen in a year. There are a number of reasons more people don’t take helicopters to work including safety concerns, noise, licensure, and a lack of flexibility, and it isn’t clear that a driving car will fix them.
  2. Regulatory requirements. It’s clear that even if flying cars exist, and are capable of autonomous/semiautonomous flight, there will be regulatory barriers of entry. People that own them will need to be licensed. Traffic will be regulated. The end product between self-driving  ground cars and self-driving flying cars will not be sufficiently different to justify the cost of licensure for widespread adoption of the flying product. If neither are self-driving, flying will be too hard for the general population.
  3. NIMBY-ism. Why will skys be congested? Because people will not want flying vehicles over their property. Property lines will extend 5,000-10,000 ft above the ground and cities will not allow flying except for specified flyways. Flying will lose its luster quickly when it has the same traffic, speed, noise, and route limitations of the ground.
Observations, Prediction, Technology

Posts I wish I had the vocabulary to write

pollywannamath

I’ve had a few recurring thoughts this year that I haven’t been able to materialize into ideas and write about. I’m posting introductions to each in the hopes that I will be able to write more concretely about each in the coming year.

  • A societal need for religion— I firmly believe it is important for a society to have a number of anchors that oppose each other to maintain the right amount of societal tension necessary for growth and to hedge against extreme thoughts. In this worldview, organizations that no longer appear beneficial to society perform key functions and are necessary to hold the collective together. We should hold unions, children’s clubs, and organized religions in far greater esteem than we do. Once an anchor is dislodged, it is much harder to reestablish and crucial elements of society will be destabilized.
    • What’s holding me back:
      • I can’t identify the production function that argues for trade unions and organized religion at the expense of secular neoliberal policies and improves outcomes.
      • Viewing organized religion as a pacifying and necessary force is a hard position to defend currently. I have true ideas on how a move toward spiritualism destabilized the religious anchor, but those deserve their own post.
      • What are the links and harms? Destabilization captures the essence of my concern, but it isn’t a tangible fear. How do we get to the bad place?

        The Bad Place

 

  • Data Privacy falls far too low on the societal priority stack–We lost the war for our data with big corporations; trying to live without Google or Amazon would be lunacy. However, we are lucky that the corporations currently mining data have been relatively responsible to date. Even the instances where companies have faced public outcry for data privacy violations (e.g.Cambridge Analytica) have been relatively minor compared to the potential data privacy violations that are possible. A mix of policy updates, public behavior changes, corporate incentive shifts, and technological advancements are needed to usher in a safer connected world.
    • What’s holding me back:
      • Links to harms. It’s really easy to look at health data companies like 23andMe and identify risks that come from selling health and consumer data. I can imagine a snake oil company targeting populations at increased risk of cancer with high mortality rates based on data purchased from a company like 23andMe. It’s much harder to identify a likely harm to the average healthy 25-year-old that could come from her Facebook data without inventing a terrible conspiracy.
      • Policies have too many unintended consequences. Sound policies like GDPR might not be so sound in practice. Without a good sense for a better path forward, its hard to formulate an idea for why the status quo isn’t good.

 

  • We shouldn’t conflate self-driving and alternative fuel cars– Okay, so this one has an idea, but I can’ t vocalize why it matters. There are a few items that are clear:
    • Alternative fuels are a net benefit and should be pursued.
      • It isn’t clear that electricity will be the best source, but it is probably the most flexible alternative source.
      • Combustion engines will be the most flexible fuel option for a long time to come.
      • There is probably a link between alternative fuel and aggressive copywrite legislation that prevents home and mechanic repair (similar to the farming industry’s relationship with new tech).
    • Self-driving cars will benefit society when adoption is high. Self driving technology should be pursued.
      • The link between self-driving cars and car ownership rates is not obvious (deserves its own post).
      • Self-driving technology will see widespread adoption much faster in commercial fleets than with the public-at-large.
      • The implementation requires as much policy change as it does technological change. Not enough attention is paid to the policy implications.
      •  Self-driving cars may increase congestion and urban sprawl in the short to medium term. Self-driving technology is not, at its core, green technology.
    • Wide adoption of self-driving technology in new cars that use internal combustion energy presents a worse ecological future.
    • What’s holding me back:
      • Too many competing thoughts–There is, somewhere in my thoughts, a unifying theory of the suburbs, automotive advancement, and societal good. I haven’t found it.
      • Competing visions of self-driving cars–In a world where every car is self-driving are there a greater or fewer number of cars on the road? If there are many more, do the efficiency gains outweigh the additional cars? Are parking lots an orderly place? What is the role of public transit? What do the cars do during the workday?
      • Timeline–If pervasive green technology is 25 years away, and self-driving tech is 5 years away, then its likely that green tech and self-driving policy will be in sync. It isn’t clear to me where we are in the development of either technology; it is clear that we have not started on the necessary policy changes.
Innovation, Prediction, Uncategorized

Perfectly Flawed Whiskey (or Whisky)

pollywannamath

Vox recently released an article that describes the culture and money surrounding the whiskey collection industry. I predict that 50 years from now the most expensive whiskeys will be original unopened bottles of rarified whiskeys from past eras (no change), but the second tier of whiskeys will be unopened bottles of whiskeys from deeply flawed vintages of respected houses (change).

Supply and demand laws traditional work well to raise the cost of aged spirits. The supply of 20 year aged Pappy is not going to increase any time soon (it takes 20 years…). Increases to the supply of aged spirits tend to outrage consumers. Remember the Maker’s Mark debacle? Almost every year, one of the major whiskey houses are shocked by a natural disaster, such as a breakage or flood. Given the supply constraints, even whiskeys released in a year are sometimes rare.

What will happen to the industry when all of the supply constraints are removed? “Lab grown” whiskeys present the promise of an alternative world where whiskey created last night can mirror the flavor profile of a 1923 Macallan for less than a bottle of your father’s Cutty Sark. Although I expect the lab grown whiskey industry to face strong resistance in its nascent years, the promise of a perfect spirit without perfect spirit cost is too appealing to remain niche. The first lab grown whiskey is already commercially available for $40, although reviews are divided.

Why will flawed spirits garner high values? Because in this alternative world of perfect spirits, the only flavors that will be hard to obtain are flawed whiskeys made in the traditional ways. Connoisseurs will seek hard-to-find flavor profiles. A 1946 that smells of formaldehyde and tastes of stinky cheese will never be recreated for mass-production. Have a toast to our brave new world!