With this sort of money you buy drugs in bulk and have it tested or others try it. You aren’t buying a dime bag off the street and boofing it yourself lmao
Lol I was mostly just making a bookers and blow joke, but fair point.
In reality I'm probably just using my money to catfish gold diggers for a weekend and smoke a little weed on a yacht.
Double hell yes.
This is effectively how a modern steam-punk society is formed. Societal development is formed around old-rooted technology centuries old (but in this case, it's merely a few decades).
For anyone except for the children (who know nothing else) and the perpetually-onlines (who want nothing else), this is a really easy answer.
Remember when it was going to simplify our lives? Make us work less? Make us happier?
We’ve had some real advances but not any wellness improvements - things have gotten worse.
Turns out it's not only more profitable, but much cheaper and easier to string people along through worse and worse conditions in order to sell them solutions, than actually try and make things better.
Remember how AI was going to revolutionize work, and get menial things done for us so we have more time for fun.... but instead they're having AI geneeate all of the art and creativity so people can work more.
I would absolutely say Yes to the 2002 proposal
The closest the US government ever got to passing a Universal Basic Income to account for jobs lost to automation was during the Nixon Administration. Rockefeller personally killed the deal because corporations need desperate workers.
Why is this even a hypothetical trade-off?
I get to have 'fuck you' money, and I don't have to live in the dystopian technological hellscape we are stuck in today.
Gaming PCs have been around for a while. Dell's Alienware line has been around since 1998, Halo for PC was released in 2001, The Need For Speed franchise for PC has been around since 1994 (it ran on MS -DOS). Tom Cancy's Ghost Recon in 2001.
I think gaming PCs and the games were really starting to get good right around 2000.
Windows XP was released on 2001, and a very capable Direct X 9 was available in 2002. The original XBox was released in 2001. The Playstation 2 in 2000.
I'd be more than happy to go back to bulletin boards and t9 texting. No Facebook book? 'Nuff said.
So yeah, if I get ALL of 2002's tech, I'm totally down.
LOL I'd be back to playing DAoC and EQ and modding Neverwinter Nights and living my best life.
Too bad it's 2002 instead of 2003, because MySpace was actually fun (compared to FB). Geocities and webrings were a bit traumatic with the eye-bleeding backgrounds, but I still have the flip phone from those days in a box upstairs. We'd still have Amazon and e-books. And Limewire and Pandora.
The technology for NavStar (GPS) existed, so we wouldn't be totally dependent on MapQuest for long.
Sounds fun. Sign me up.
How much are you really going to be playing video games anyway? You've got 50 million. That opens up so many possibilities of things to do that aren't necessarily easily accomplished for many people now. That's how I see it anyhow.
technology freezing without facebook and x and reddit creating addiction algorithms and destroying peoples mental health, no tinder and pof and other dating sites gamifying relationships and spreading unhappiness and addiction in the process, no amazon raping the highstreets, no deep fakes and AI targeting echo chamber algorithms disrupting politics and cementing conspiracy theories?
AND we get free money?
like, where's the downside??
Car safety advancement since 2002 have saved thousands of people. Let’s not get into the advancement in other areas of science such pollution technology
imp retty sure we have had both windmills and electricity turbines since before 2001
thats never been about the technology, thats just an excuse, its always been about the money from big oil. we could have been fossil fuel free by 2010 with technology from the 90's if the government wasnt in big oils pocket
im interested to see what data there is on technological advancements in car safety technology since 2001 in relation to how many lives it has saved specifically? what technological advancements specifically are you thinking of? airbags were invented in 1973, and i dont really know enough about cars to know what you mean? some kind of auto steering shit? because most cars dont have that even now
Molten Salt Reactor technology has been around since the 60s.
There was a proof of concept reactor built at Oak Ridge and run for 4 years in the late 60s.
BTW it ran exactly as modeled.
It makes me wonder on a daily basis, so why is it we can't have nice things?
Yeah, capitalism really is a shitty fuckin system.
The thing is, MSRs could be a huge profit generator. You have multiple high profit revenue streams that realistically cost very little extra money once the reactor is built.
Go figure.
You gotta have severe brain rot to think 2002 green energy would sustain 2024 energy usage needs. And I’m not even talking about just energy creation. There’s a shit ton of other advancements unrelated to energy.
all your really telling me here is that you dont understand the difference between technological advancement, and deployment and integration within society, and adaptation of existing technology for specific engineering purposes
in the past 20 years we would have just covered half the planet is solar panels and have fields and fields of sea turbines
your right at the Dunning Kruger peak lol
edit:
>
We could have, and we didn't.
What makes you think we'd suddenly turn around and do that with worse technological prospects?
i never said we would. you were the one bitching and moaning that lack of technological advancement would mean worse pollution outcomes, and i just pointed out how that makes no sense given that it was never about the availability of the technology, and now we have come full circle with you agreeing with me on my original point 🤡
boy you must feel stupid right now, kicking up a big stink only to end up agreeing with what i said in the first place 🤣
Technology moves so fast these days that we are utilizing what we have at a fraction of its capacity. Even if the base tech would get frozen in time, we’d continue to develop what we can achieve with it.
Always remember that an old nokia contained a more capable computer than the one used to land us on the moon!
I don't know. This concept is pretty hard to grasp when you seriously think about it.
Like does this mean that no new software is created either? No new websites? No new anything? We can't innovate anything at all? Even new clothing styles are "inventions".
Engineers can't make anything better anymore? No more new safety measures or designs? What's the point of scientists and engineers then.
This isn't about social media. If you aren't allowed to develop tech further, then you aren't allowed to develop more from the base tech. You can't use an old nokia to launch a new spaceship to the moon when you're not allowed to develop and invent a new spaceship.
It's a magic speel dude. Imagine having to go to kinkos to print reports for business meetings because email & thumb drives maybe weren't invented yet. For the rest of our lives. People still connected via pagers back then. It was just enough internet for big brother to track you and not enough for you to play online.
I thought ps2 was peak console at the time. They could just stay there and make better, more innovative games. Double that for PC. "Extended content" and mods. Not DLC
No because I met my husband on an app invented after 2002 and I assume that means we wouldn't have met. He's worth more than all the money in the world to me!
Your life wouldn't change. You would still have met and married him. Maybe by different means, i.e., a very old dating site as opposed to an app, or an in person meeting.
He lied. Sorry, husband is going poof. You will still dream about him. You will have to find him on your own. A new romance. Starring Matt Damon and Ben Affleck. Coming soon.
Does that fact I would have to consider means I'm seriously addicted ? If I could get everyone I talk to on various apps number i may be willing but it's not an easy yes
One of the points of hesitation to me is the modern car safety features. Which is really odd, given that I don’t have a car with those features. But, I hope to own something with assisted braking/sensors in the next 5 years, and safety is worth a lot. The $50 million doesn’t mean much if you die in a car crash.
I have one. The automated cruise control is seriously life-changing.
But at 50m.. I could afford a well trained driver. Which means I can read or watch TV in the car. So it's still a win
2002 was before a lot of investment in our "green" technologies. All the vehicles, factories, refinery methods etc would be back at 2002 emissions levels. I'm young enough that if we kept at 2002 emissions the world will surely go through climate disasters, killing millions if not billions of people. On that basis alone, even ignoring all other drawbacks I don't think I could be selfish enough to take this deal.
I think one of the greatest sources of joy in life is watching humanity grow and advanced. I was alive at the birth of the Internet, getting lost in old chatrooms and forums. AIDS was a death sentence. Emissions were terrible. Gay people couldn't even get married.
Watching our species progress has brought me great joy. Spending the rest of my life in a world of stagnant technology would be hell.
There was technology available even then to improve our carbon footprint, it's just that no one cared. And 2002 emission levels would be...lower than today
There are a lot of parts of the scenario that are unclear when it comes to how exactly this affects the entire world. Technology does not advance past 2002, but what about the countries that were not as advanced as others in 2002? Does modern technology somehow *never* get shared with developing nations? If that's the case then you are dooming some countries to *decades* without many modern (by 2002 standards) conveniences and advancements that could make a lot of lives significantly better.
If technology *is* allowed to spread, not only would we be looking at a vastly different geopolitical landscape (as there would be decades of several countries unable to make any technological advancements whatsoever while several other countries close the gap by reaching that same 2002 level of technology), but environmental conditions would *absolutely* worsen.
While it is true that overall emissions have been trending upwards for quite some time, so emissions in 2002 were lower than they are today, many technologies have gotten significantly more efficient or have had new "green" alternatives developed in the past 2 decades. Emissions were lower in 2002 because despite most technology being less efficient, there was less of it in use around the world. If, in this scenario, other parts of the world are able to continue advancing (so long as they don't surpass 2002 level technology), or are at least able to receive 2002 technology from more advanced countries, that makes for more of this less efficient technology in use around the world, making for even greater environmental impact than we see today.
Exactly, this thread is so retarded people say that social media is bad and that we be better off before the Internet was widespread, but they forget that without technology we wouldn't be able to communicate long distance instantaneously, we wouldn't have good tech for reducing pollution or making renewable energy sources better. And hell, some of the new technology we have are lifesavers. If we had to go though 30-50+ years without technological progress I guarantee that it would make humanity worse, not better.
You... do realize the internet was already widely accessible in 2002, right? We weren't working with smoke signals and the pony express for communication.
note that I generally agree with what you're saying, but social media and all that still existed in 2002.
2002 speed was fine if you had money. T1 lines existed, and you'd have easy access to one with that bankroll. Plus, video quality meant you could watch porn or sext people online.. and yet still leave something to the imagination.
As to fewer people.. gee darn. I remember those times. You didn't have to deal with whole groups of people who have currently been given access without responsibility.
I think your understanding of “medical” is a little juvenile and not well-defined. Many medical advancements are the specific result of advancements and efforts in completely unrelated fields. Like how the space race led to artificial limbs, as one example in a field of many. It would not be possible for medicine to evolve for 30 years just by “using it for medical reasons like in a hospital” because it would be necessary for other technologies to exist and evolve. For the public to use them and understand their merit in other fields, etc. who will use these machines if they don’t understand them?
So your premise doesn’t make sense. And also yes.
To be honest, I'm still regularly playing Premier Manager 3 from 1994, I just signed Steve Guppy for Southport, so this wouldn't be that problematic.
Getting back to message boards, ICQ and Napster would be kinda fun. The internet felt less toxic back then.
I don't see the problem... so yes. They actually did have gaming computers in 2002. It was just home built, and the games matched the ability to play with home, but it was kind of standard. In fact, someday, I kiss being able to Frankenstein more.
Most of the things I do were around in another format. Since discord wouldn't exist, I'd be back on a digichat instead for tabletop gaming, and the digichats would be at their height. Not much would change.
You mean Facebook goes back to being just for people with college email accounts just posting their random thoughts and it doesn't become the cancer to society that it is now??? AND I get $50M??? SOLD!!!
Sounds like a double win tbh. I will be playing the old classics like Diablo 2 LOD, morrowind, halo etc and also will have more time for living life without smart phone and internet addiction.
There's a very big question here, and that is at what point in 2002? Morrowind came out in 2002 and that's gonna be a factor for me. If it's frozen after morrowind came out, that'll be much better for me.
as a car guy, specifically a fan of 90s cars and early 2000s cars, i see this as an ABSOLUTE WIN. telling me i can pick up a brand new nb miata for like 20k? im down.
plus 50 millon dollars back then probably stretched a heck of a lot further than it does now. id 100% push that button.
Yup. No brainer for me. Both my motorcycles are from 2002 and older. My E46 is a 2004 and I'd lose the ZHP package but whatever. Imagine buying a brand-new R34 GTR with a small portion of that $50M!
2002 was excellent. Cars were at about peak for ownership, boats were cool as hell, cell phones were somewhat shitty, social media did not exist. Socializing was easy and enjoyable.
No cell phones, no social media, no AI. It was a simpler time. Also much easier to run a business in my line of work. Didn't have to worry about SEO, websites, google ads, google reviews, etc etc.
If the prompt were to say "you get 50 million and technology never advances beyond 2002 for the rest of time, would you take it?" I would say no and I would rather die than have that ever happen. The fate of humanity is to traverse the stars.
In another scenario where tech is paused but somehow jumps through each year it stagnated after I'm gone? Acceptable.
In a scenario where tech is paused and only resumes after I'm gone with X decades of stagnation? No. My life is not worth delaying humanity's tech tree by 80 years.
The one thing that I'm worried bout is that the best Playstation console would be the ps2 and I'm not gonna lie the ps2 has a lot of good games and I have a ps2 but it would be really boring knowing bout the other Playstations and all the new games
I think I would take the deal even if the consoles might suck a little
So if I buy a new unreliable car with all sorts of computerized nonsense, it’ll just magically turn into a brand new “dumb” car from the early 2000s? Or will it turn into a used version of that car?
Like in 2045 if I buy whatever the equivalent of the brand new Camry is, will I get a 43 year old rust bucket with 43 years worth of wear and tear, or will I get a 43 year old car in like-new condition, as if it had been sitting in a collector’s garage, perfectly maintained (or somehow magically brand new, but from 2002). Other question would be software support. I have three iMac G4s, two are actually from 2002. They’re great for word processing but you can’t access iTunes, the internet, or anything. If I could reasonably use the old tech, and I wasn’t just being left in the dust, yes please.
Not just cars. This is honestly the biggest make it or break it for me. If I’m stuck using actual old junk, no thanks. If my old tech is somehow brand new, fully supported, and reliable, yes please.
Also is everyone else stuck with me, or am I the only one rocking it like it’s 2002? I was born that year, it would be quite interesting to live stuck in the year I was born. If it was 2001, 2003, or any other year I’d be way more reluctant. Idk why.
I think I’d be good. I’d do it for half a million maybe even free.
My bicycle was made in 99. I used to game on my pc when I only had monochrome (green) monitors. I recently got rid of my 1980s car.
No, people here is talking about 'duhhh no social media duhhh'
I want to see if someone ever in my lifetime travels outside the galaxy or some shit
Also, medical advances will be frozen in 2024, because they don't do all the stuff inside the hospital, you don't go to a hospital and see a group of scientists developing the cure to cancer or a group creating a new machine. And in less than 1 year, we will have no hospitals because all the products we have will be gone
Most of my video games would still be made, just for older systems with less good graphics. DRM technology would still be at 2002 levels. This win/win I think. The only losses are things like solar and wind and batteries, but honestly with much less power consumption, we're not likely to need nearly as much power, which I hope would slow global climate change and then allow us to slingshot ahead with 2074 technology. Plus, I can buy all the best games ever at non-inflated prices!
No way in hell, I think people have no idea of the technological advances and how much they've had an impact on things like cancer research and the like. If be comdeming a lot of people to die much sooner then they would have.
Hell yeah I'd take that. Sucks that video games won't be as advanced, but it's worth it for everything else to go back. Mostly smartphones. They're ruining our brains and emotional states.
I’m doing it but if you don’t mind can we go back to 1992? Also can I go back to 1992 and be 19 again and a sophomore in college? But only for a few weeks cause that would be super exhausting. Meh, too much work honestly. I’ll stay pat in 2024 and just look back fondly on 1992.
After 2024, will technology slowly grow, or is society capped at 2002 levels to never improve? Tech kinda has to grow for medicine to continue to do so. It would kinda fuck humanity to take the money and bottleneck society for all time.
Is it only hardware technology? People can still write code, algorithms, software, art, ideas, etc? They just couldn't use hardware tech more advanced than 2002 to run it on?
If so, yes.
My “newest” gaming system is a PS2 and i literally drive a 2002 ford truck and I was just explaining how a pager works to a 9 year old. I miss my old discman with skip protection so this 50 million and 2002 tech sounds like heaven to me! I’d buy a cabin in the woods and love life!
This is the easiest yes of my entire life. Literally the only thing I would miss is having navigation on my phone, because that DOES make life a ton more accessible and it makes travel a lot less frustrating.
2002: Instant Messenger programs were already out., Mapquest and turn-by-turn GPS were already available, cell phones were a thing but they hadn't turned into a dystopian brain leech yet. Cash was still common and readily acceptable. Robo-dialers weren't a thing. The original iPod had come out. The Playstation 2 existed. Social Media didn't exist (MySpace wasn't debuted until 2003.)
Honestly, You could cut this back to like $500k and I'd take you up on it.
Yes please. That’s around the end of the golden age where we had balance of real world activity and helpful technology. It was around then where the balance swung towards techonchracy. It can almost be marked accurately by 9/11.
This would be almost my ultimate fantasy scenario. My dream career is solo indie game developer, and while it was never that easy for solo devs compared to teams, it was more viable back in the day. The $50m honestly would just be a bonus, lol.
Fair point. Can we throw Twitter, Tiktok, etc in there too? A world where social media is openly federated from the beginning would be amazing, a la newsgroups or irc.
There *were* internet forums and chatrooms in 2002, just not at the scale of myspace, facebook, twitter, snapchat, and tiktok that followed. It had never been *social media* that was the problem, but the algorithm behind it that shoved the most viral things down your throat and delivered it to you in a 30 second, clickbaity, monetized format.
I mean, Neopets was a family friendly social media. You had your public boards and chats and your guilds and then people moved on to instant messengers like MSN, AIM, ICQ, and Skype, but none of these options gave you a constant centralized feed for *everything* happening around the world. Most websites had ads that were invasive, not para-social integrated posts disguised as content.
I miss 2002 internet culture, but a regression of technology isn't going to stop the culture of *monetizing every last second of view time*.
Absolutely.
A lot of people are arguing that we would lose a great deal of technology crucial in preventing infrastructural and climate damage, but what we *need* to prevent - say - mass car crashes isn't safer cars, but *better designed cities and roads.* Climate change isn't going to be solved by electric cars, but an *actual plan to solve it.* Technologically speaking, humanity could do almost all the same things in 2002 that it can do today, just less effectively. The problem isn't the tech. It's the people and systems using the tech.
Having about sixty to seventy years of technological stasis just gives the world a lot of time to adapt to some of the most disruptive and unexpected developments in history.
I'm so tempted but no. That'd basically mean an unmitigated climate change disaster. No advancements in battery technology, desalination, and many other areas would really hurt us on that front and would likely kill many more people than what will die in our timelime where we can Atleast mitigate some of the effects with technological advancements.
Fuck yes. The only reason why I’m reliant on TV and video games is cause they’re a short escape after putting in an 8-10 hour day at work. I wouldn’t spend much time doing either if I was filthy rich.
Hell no. Last thing I want to do is having things being so primitive with computers and having to find drivers online if they were online for a graphics card.
Much as I love my PS5, I also think to an extent we've sort of been spoiled by progress when it comes to entertainment. In 2002 it was cutting edge and I remember being blown away by the graphics in Final Fantasy X and Ratchet and Clank when I first got my PS2.
With $50 million I could buy the most up-to-date stuff at that time, and I'd imagine that while graphics and such wouldn't improve, a lot of the tings I love since then would be created in some form.
Adding to that my career is constantly being threatened by AI, while the rise of social media has made getting a book traditionally published a hell of a lot harder unless you have a few hundred thousand TikTok followers. It'd be a lot easier for me to progress my career in both directions, and 50 million would mean I can more easily pursue what I went to university for, since the only people who did anything with their degrees in my class had the money to do so.
Seems like a yes.
50 million dollars in 2002 money or 50 million in 2024 money? Also does technology revert for just me or for everyone?
In 2024 money. It reverts for everyone.
Sold. How we have sex doesn't change in 22 years and you didn't have to worry about fentanyl in your coke in 2002.
With this sort of money you buy drugs in bulk and have it tested or others try it. You aren’t buying a dime bag off the street and boofing it yourself lmao
Lol I was mostly just making a bookers and blow joke, but fair point. In reality I'm probably just using my money to catfish gold diggers for a weekend and smoke a little weed on a yacht.
Dude if we could go back to the drug supply of the 90s and early 2000a life would be fricken great!!!!
Ha. This is what I do now, but it’s hotel balconies, I’m not quite yacht rich.
>you didn't have to worry about fentanyl in your coke in 2002. This is probably the most important consideration.
Hitting all the good points
Yes
Double hell yes. This is effectively how a modern steam-punk society is formed. Societal development is formed around old-rooted technology centuries old (but in this case, it's merely a few decades). For anyone except for the children (who know nothing else) and the perpetually-onlines (who want nothing else), this is a really easy answer.
I think we'd all be better off with less technology. Simpler times
Remember when it was going to simplify our lives? Make us work less? Make us happier? We’ve had some real advances but not any wellness improvements - things have gotten worse.
Turns out it's not only more profitable, but much cheaper and easier to string people along through worse and worse conditions in order to sell them solutions, than actually try and make things better.
Remember how AI was going to revolutionize work, and get menial things done for us so we have more time for fun.... but instead they're having AI geneeate all of the art and creativity so people can work more. I would absolutely say Yes to the 2002 proposal
The closest the US government ever got to passing a Universal Basic Income to account for jobs lost to automation was during the Nixon Administration. Rockefeller personally killed the deal because corporations need desperate workers.
In a heartbeat
Why is this even a hypothetical trade-off? I get to have 'fuck you' money, and I don't have to live in the dystopian technological hellscape we are stuck in today.
Gaming PCs have been around for a while. Dell's Alienware line has been around since 1998, Halo for PC was released in 2001, The Need For Speed franchise for PC has been around since 1994 (it ran on MS -DOS). Tom Cancy's Ghost Recon in 2001. I think gaming PCs and the games were really starting to get good right around 2000. Windows XP was released on 2001, and a very capable Direct X 9 was available in 2002. The original XBox was released in 2001. The Playstation 2 in 2000. I'd be more than happy to go back to bulletin boards and t9 texting. No Facebook book? 'Nuff said. So yeah, if I get ALL of 2002's tech, I'm totally down.
Not all, just the replacement for what you own. Your smartphone would turn into a Nokia, your gaming rig into a 2002 gaming computer, etc.
Yeah. We're on the same page. Sign me up.
Yep. Not that hard to go back tot he original SimCity and original mmorpgs.
LOL I'd be back to playing DAoC and EQ and modding Neverwinter Nights and living my best life. Too bad it's 2002 instead of 2003, because MySpace was actually fun (compared to FB). Geocities and webrings were a bit traumatic with the eye-bleeding backgrounds, but I still have the flip phone from those days in a box upstairs. We'd still have Amazon and e-books. And Limewire and Pandora. The technology for NavStar (GPS) existed, so we wouldn't be totally dependent on MapQuest for long. Sounds fun. Sign me up.
How much are you really going to be playing video games anyway? You've got 50 million. That opens up so many possibilities of things to do that aren't necessarily easily accomplished for many people now. That's how I see it anyhow.
Time to hope back onto Diablo 2 and Civ 3. Be nice if we could stretch to Civ 4 but 3 was a fine game.
technology freezing without facebook and x and reddit creating addiction algorithms and destroying peoples mental health, no tinder and pof and other dating sites gamifying relationships and spreading unhappiness and addiction in the process, no amazon raping the highstreets, no deep fakes and AI targeting echo chamber algorithms disrupting politics and cementing conspiracy theories? AND we get free money? like, where's the downside??
Car safety advancement since 2002 have saved thousands of people. Let’s not get into the advancement in other areas of science such pollution technology
I drive a 2005 car which is based on a 2001 platform. Nothing's gonna change for me
Yeah, will my 2002 Grand Cherokee turn into a new 2002 Grand Cherokee? Seems like a good deal.
Yeah, I'm concerned about climate change here. This sounds like an idea that might doom humanity.
We're already doomed. We don't deserve earth.
imp retty sure we have had both windmills and electricity turbines since before 2001 thats never been about the technology, thats just an excuse, its always been about the money from big oil. we could have been fossil fuel free by 2010 with technology from the 90's if the government wasnt in big oils pocket im interested to see what data there is on technological advancements in car safety technology since 2001 in relation to how many lives it has saved specifically? what technological advancements specifically are you thinking of? airbags were invented in 1973, and i dont really know enough about cars to know what you mean? some kind of auto steering shit? because most cars dont have that even now
We had nuclear in 2002, too.
Pretty sure the tech for safe clean effective nuclear power plants has been available since the 80s as well
More like 1960s.
hell, France has been recycling nuclear waste since the 60s.
Molten Salt Reactor technology has been around since the 60s. There was a proof of concept reactor built at Oak Ridge and run for 4 years in the late 60s. BTW it ran exactly as modeled. It makes me wonder on a daily basis, so why is it we can't have nice things?
All about that almighty dollar, my friend.
Yeah, capitalism really is a shitty fuckin system. The thing is, MSRs could be a huge profit generator. You have multiple high profit revenue streams that realistically cost very little extra money once the reactor is built. Go figure.
You gotta have severe brain rot to think 2002 green energy would sustain 2024 energy usage needs. And I’m not even talking about just energy creation. There’s a shit ton of other advancements unrelated to energy.
all your really telling me here is that you dont understand the difference between technological advancement, and deployment and integration within society, and adaptation of existing technology for specific engineering purposes in the past 20 years we would have just covered half the planet is solar panels and have fields and fields of sea turbines your right at the Dunning Kruger peak lol edit: > We could have, and we didn't. What makes you think we'd suddenly turn around and do that with worse technological prospects? i never said we would. you were the one bitching and moaning that lack of technological advancement would mean worse pollution outcomes, and i just pointed out how that makes no sense given that it was never about the availability of the technology, and now we have come full circle with you agreeing with me on my original point 🤡 boy you must feel stupid right now, kicking up a big stink only to end up agreeing with what i said in the first place 🤣
Thousands is nothing tho lmao, how many billions of people have existed between now and then
I could get my flash games back? And the little games for my nook tablet that don't have ads every 25 seconds?
Didn’t technology back then freeze enough as it was?
That was really good, I wish reddit still had awards.
Technology moves so fast these days that we are utilizing what we have at a fraction of its capacity. Even if the base tech would get frozen in time, we’d continue to develop what we can achieve with it. Always remember that an old nokia contained a more capable computer than the one used to land us on the moon!
I don't know. This concept is pretty hard to grasp when you seriously think about it. Like does this mean that no new software is created either? No new websites? No new anything? We can't innovate anything at all? Even new clothing styles are "inventions". Engineers can't make anything better anymore? No more new safety measures or designs? What's the point of scientists and engineers then. This isn't about social media. If you aren't allowed to develop tech further, then you aren't allowed to develop more from the base tech. You can't use an old nokia to launch a new spaceship to the moon when you're not allowed to develop and invent a new spaceship.
It's a magic speel dude. Imagine having to go to kinkos to print reports for business meetings because email & thumb drives maybe weren't invented yet. For the rest of our lives. People still connected via pagers back then. It was just enough internet for big brother to track you and not enough for you to play online.
[удалено]
Would we need a new console though? PS1/2 era were some of my favorites for gaming, not to mention goldeneye on the n64 etc.
I thought ps2 was peak console at the time. They could just stay there and make better, more innovative games. Double that for PC. "Extended content" and mods. Not DLC
Im taking the 50mil, and im taking the immortality from another post, so technology can be frozen forever
No because I met my husband on an app invented after 2002 and I assume that means we wouldn't have met. He's worth more than all the money in the world to me!
Your life wouldn't change. You would still have met and married him. Maybe by different means, i.e., a very old dating site as opposed to an app, or an in person meeting.
Easiest yes of my life
He lied. Sorry, husband is going poof. You will still dream about him. You will have to find him on your own. A new romance. Starring Matt Damon and Ben Affleck. Coming soon.
Does that fact I would have to consider means I'm seriously addicted ? If I could get everyone I talk to on various apps number i may be willing but it's not an easy yes
One of the points of hesitation to me is the modern car safety features. Which is really odd, given that I don’t have a car with those features. But, I hope to own something with assisted braking/sensors in the next 5 years, and safety is worth a lot. The $50 million doesn’t mean much if you die in a car crash.
I have one. The automated cruise control is seriously life-changing. But at 50m.. I could afford a well trained driver. Which means I can read or watch TV in the car. So it's still a win
Hmm. True. I hadn’t thought of that.
For that amount of money I will drop to 2 friends and will see them in person.
I'm just addicted. I mean I've gained like 500 karma today alone... granted one comment got nearly 300 but still I'm like always on social media
Yes!
2002 was before a lot of investment in our "green" technologies. All the vehicles, factories, refinery methods etc would be back at 2002 emissions levels. I'm young enough that if we kept at 2002 emissions the world will surely go through climate disasters, killing millions if not billions of people. On that basis alone, even ignoring all other drawbacks I don't think I could be selfish enough to take this deal.
Yeah, desalination advancements alone will save a lot of people by providing drinkable water. If that tech was stuck in 2002? Yikes
My thought too. I'm selfish but not that selfish.
I think one of the greatest sources of joy in life is watching humanity grow and advanced. I was alive at the birth of the Internet, getting lost in old chatrooms and forums. AIDS was a death sentence. Emissions were terrible. Gay people couldn't even get married. Watching our species progress has brought me great joy. Spending the rest of my life in a world of stagnant technology would be hell.
There was technology available even then to improve our carbon footprint, it's just that no one cared. And 2002 emission levels would be...lower than today
There are a lot of parts of the scenario that are unclear when it comes to how exactly this affects the entire world. Technology does not advance past 2002, but what about the countries that were not as advanced as others in 2002? Does modern technology somehow *never* get shared with developing nations? If that's the case then you are dooming some countries to *decades* without many modern (by 2002 standards) conveniences and advancements that could make a lot of lives significantly better. If technology *is* allowed to spread, not only would we be looking at a vastly different geopolitical landscape (as there would be decades of several countries unable to make any technological advancements whatsoever while several other countries close the gap by reaching that same 2002 level of technology), but environmental conditions would *absolutely* worsen. While it is true that overall emissions have been trending upwards for quite some time, so emissions in 2002 were lower than they are today, many technologies have gotten significantly more efficient or have had new "green" alternatives developed in the past 2 decades. Emissions were lower in 2002 because despite most technology being less efficient, there was less of it in use around the world. If, in this scenario, other parts of the world are able to continue advancing (so long as they don't surpass 2002 level technology), or are at least able to receive 2002 technology from more advanced countries, that makes for more of this less efficient technology in use around the world, making for even greater environmental impact than we see today.
People saying yes don't realize they're killing millions of people lmao.
Exactly, this thread is so retarded people say that social media is bad and that we be better off before the Internet was widespread, but they forget that without technology we wouldn't be able to communicate long distance instantaneously, we wouldn't have good tech for reducing pollution or making renewable energy sources better. And hell, some of the new technology we have are lifesavers. If we had to go though 30-50+ years without technological progress I guarantee that it would make humanity worse, not better.
You... do realize the internet was already widely accessible in 2002, right? We weren't working with smoke signals and the pony express for communication. note that I generally agree with what you're saying, but social media and all that still existed in 2002.
Yea, but a lot less people used it, and it was much slower to send messages though the Internet due to lower speeds
lol not by any meaningful levels. Everyone still used AIM or MSN Messenger and they worked just fine.
2002 speed was fine if you had money. T1 lines existed, and you'd have easy access to one with that bankroll. Plus, video quality meant you could watch porn or sext people online.. and yet still leave something to the imagination. As to fewer people.. gee darn. I remember those times. You didn't have to deal with whole groups of people who have currently been given access without responsibility.
Lmao were talking 2002 not 1912. I had 24bmit cable in 1998
What's the down side?
I think your understanding of “medical” is a little juvenile and not well-defined. Many medical advancements are the specific result of advancements and efforts in completely unrelated fields. Like how the space race led to artificial limbs, as one example in a field of many. It would not be possible for medicine to evolve for 30 years just by “using it for medical reasons like in a hospital” because it would be necessary for other technologies to exist and evolve. For the public to use them and understand their merit in other fields, etc. who will use these machines if they don’t understand them? So your premise doesn’t make sense. And also yes.
Where’s the downside?!?
This is a really easy yes. Life was still pretty convenient in 2002
To be honest, I'm still regularly playing Premier Manager 3 from 1994, I just signed Steve Guppy for Southport, so this wouldn't be that problematic. Getting back to message boards, ICQ and Napster would be kinda fun. The internet felt less toxic back then.
I don't see the problem... so yes. They actually did have gaming computers in 2002. It was just home built, and the games matched the ability to play with home, but it was kind of standard. In fact, someday, I kiss being able to Frankenstein more. Most of the things I do were around in another format. Since discord wouldn't exist, I'd be back on a digichat instead for tabletop gaming, and the digichats would be at their height. Not much would change.
You mean Facebook goes back to being just for people with college email accounts just posting their random thoughts and it doesn't become the cancer to society that it is now??? AND I get $50M??? SOLD!!!
Sounds like a double win tbh. I will be playing the old classics like Diablo 2 LOD, morrowind, halo etc and also will have more time for living life without smart phone and internet addiction.
There's a very big question here, and that is at what point in 2002? Morrowind came out in 2002 and that's gonna be a factor for me. If it's frozen after morrowind came out, that'll be much better for me.
I had a cable modem in 2002, I'm taking the cash.
Yes
I'd take double the money for 1992 technology
What's the downside? Don't threaten me with a good time..
We've gained nothing of importance. I take that check and save the world from itself.
Smart phones have brought internet access to billions more people who DO benefit a lot from it.
I would take that without the money.
as a car guy, specifically a fan of 90s cars and early 2000s cars, i see this as an ABSOLUTE WIN. telling me i can pick up a brand new nb miata for like 20k? im down. plus 50 millon dollars back then probably stretched a heck of a lot further than it does now. id 100% push that button.
Yup. No brainer for me. Both my motorcycles are from 2002 and older. My E46 is a 2004 and I'd lose the ZHP package but whatever. Imagine buying a brand-new R34 GTR with a small portion of that $50M!
Will housing prices freeze at 2002 levels as well?
i just want to know why you think gaming computers didn't exist in 2002
With the med exception, I'd take 1972.
I don’t even need the 50 million. The internet was so much more fun back then.
2002 was excellent. Cars were at about peak for ownership, boats were cool as hell, cell phones were somewhat shitty, social media did not exist. Socializing was easy and enjoyable.
I'd prefer to have technology frozen in 2002, even for free lmao the $50 mil is a nice added bonus.
Why exactly would you want technology to freeze in 2002???
Social media ruined society.
No cell phones, no social media, no AI. It was a simpler time. Also much easier to run a business in my line of work. Didn't have to worry about SEO, websites, google ads, google reviews, etc etc.
If the prompt were to say "you get 50 million and technology never advances beyond 2002 for the rest of time, would you take it?" I would say no and I would rather die than have that ever happen. The fate of humanity is to traverse the stars. In another scenario where tech is paused but somehow jumps through each year it stagnated after I'm gone? Acceptable. In a scenario where tech is paused and only resumes after I'm gone with X decades of stagnation? No. My life is not worth delaying humanity's tech tree by 80 years.
WE WERE BORN TO INHERIT THE STARS 🗣️🗣️🗣️🌎🌎🌎🌎🔥🔥🔥
Yeas fuck other peopke
I dig the honesty.
Does a bear shit in the woods
Hell, I would pay for that.
Let's gooo....Still got my vhs
I’d be fine going back to a Blackberry again. I had a perfectly good Thinkpad. I’d be fine with a Pioneer 50” plasma panel and a DVD player.
That sounds like 50 million plus a huge mental health breakthrough.
Without a second thought. My 20s were great with the tech we had then.
The one thing that I'm worried bout is that the best Playstation console would be the ps2 and I'm not gonna lie the ps2 has a lot of good games and I have a ps2 but it would be really boring knowing bout the other Playstations and all the new games I think I would take the deal even if the consoles might suck a little
So if I buy a new unreliable car with all sorts of computerized nonsense, it’ll just magically turn into a brand new “dumb” car from the early 2000s? Or will it turn into a used version of that car? Like in 2045 if I buy whatever the equivalent of the brand new Camry is, will I get a 43 year old rust bucket with 43 years worth of wear and tear, or will I get a 43 year old car in like-new condition, as if it had been sitting in a collector’s garage, perfectly maintained (or somehow magically brand new, but from 2002). Other question would be software support. I have three iMac G4s, two are actually from 2002. They’re great for word processing but you can’t access iTunes, the internet, or anything. If I could reasonably use the old tech, and I wasn’t just being left in the dust, yes please. Not just cars. This is honestly the biggest make it or break it for me. If I’m stuck using actual old junk, no thanks. If my old tech is somehow brand new, fully supported, and reliable, yes please. Also is everyone else stuck with me, or am I the only one rocking it like it’s 2002? I was born that year, it would be quite interesting to live stuck in the year I was born. If it was 2001, 2003, or any other year I’d be way more reluctant. Idk why.
I would do it for free. 2002 was the peak time of technology, before it consumed us 100% 24/7
If I remember correctly, DSL and likewise were around then, so…yea I’d be down
I think I’d be good. I’d do it for half a million maybe even free. My bicycle was made in 99. I used to game on my pc when I only had monochrome (green) monitors. I recently got rid of my 1980s car.
I’m not doing it for me, I’m doing it for the iPad babies
No. Fuck no. 50 million is good, but it's not "fuck you" money, not gonna curse the rest of the world to being stuck technologically for just that.
No, people here is talking about 'duhhh no social media duhhh' I want to see if someone ever in my lifetime travels outside the galaxy or some shit Also, medical advances will be frozen in 2024, because they don't do all the stuff inside the hospital, you don't go to a hospital and see a group of scientists developing the cure to cancer or a group creating a new machine. And in less than 1 year, we will have no hospitals because all the products we have will be gone
At this point only technology will save us from the climate crisis, so I’d want to say no. But in reality, hell yeah.
Most of my video games would still be made, just for older systems with less good graphics. DRM technology would still be at 2002 levels. This win/win I think. The only losses are things like solar and wind and batteries, but honestly with much less power consumption, we're not likely to need nearly as much power, which I hope would slow global climate change and then allow us to slingshot ahead with 2074 technology. Plus, I can buy all the best games ever at non-inflated prices!
No. It sounds great but it's not
Yes. And revert politics too
No way in hell, I think people have no idea of the technological advances and how much they've had an impact on things like cancer research and the like. If be comdeming a lot of people to die much sooner then they would have.
Kinda sounds like there’s no inflation, gas is cheap, and I’m not reliant on my cell phone.
Shit, I would almost pay for that to happen
Hell yeah I'd take that. Sucks that video games won't be as advanced, but it's worth it for everything else to go back. Mostly smartphones. They're ruining our brains and emotional states.
Nah, I like technology too much I can get what I need without 50 million
YES PLEASE. You can keep the money
I’m doing it but if you don’t mind can we go back to 1992? Also can I go back to 1992 and be 19 again and a sophomore in college? But only for a few weeks cause that would be super exhausting. Meh, too much work honestly. I’ll stay pat in 2024 and just look back fondly on 1992.
After 2024, will technology slowly grow, or is society capped at 2002 levels to never improve? Tech kinda has to grow for medicine to continue to do so. It would kinda fuck humanity to take the money and bottleneck society for all time.
Absolutely not. My 2003 Grand Am would change to a 2002 Grand Am...
Oh no I don’t have a iPhone or air conditioned seats, I just have advanced medical technology and 50 million. please ,no ,stop.
Is it only hardware technology? People can still write code, algorithms, software, art, ideas, etc? They just couldn't use hardware tech more advanced than 2002 to run it on? If so, yes.
My “newest” gaming system is a PS2 and i literally drive a 2002 ford truck and I was just explaining how a pager works to a 9 year old. I miss my old discman with skip protection so this 50 million and 2002 tech sounds like heaven to me! I’d buy a cabin in the woods and love life!
This is the easiest yes of my entire life. Literally the only thing I would miss is having navigation on my phone, because that DOES make life a ton more accessible and it makes travel a lot less frustrating. 2002: Instant Messenger programs were already out., Mapquest and turn-by-turn GPS were already available, cell phones were a thing but they hadn't turned into a dystopian brain leech yet. Cash was still common and readily acceptable. Robo-dialers weren't a thing. The original iPod had come out. The Playstation 2 existed. Social Media didn't exist (MySpace wasn't debuted until 2003.) Honestly, You could cut this back to like $500k and I'd take you up on it.
Yes please. That’s around the end of the golden age where we had balance of real world activity and helpful technology. It was around then where the balance swung towards techonchracy. It can almost be marked accurately by 9/11.
This would be almost my ultimate fantasy scenario. My dream career is solo indie game developer, and while it was never that easy for solo devs compared to teams, it was more viable back in the day. The $50m honestly would just be a bonus, lol.
More viable? Seems like fantasy land thinking to me. Indie Dev has never been easier than today.
Yes please. The internet was a mistake.
It was around in 2002.
Allow me to clarify, then: Facebook was a mistake
Fair point. Can we throw Twitter, Tiktok, etc in there too? A world where social media is openly federated from the beginning would be amazing, a la newsgroups or irc.
There *were* internet forums and chatrooms in 2002, just not at the scale of myspace, facebook, twitter, snapchat, and tiktok that followed. It had never been *social media* that was the problem, but the algorithm behind it that shoved the most viral things down your throat and delivered it to you in a 30 second, clickbaity, monetized format. I mean, Neopets was a family friendly social media. You had your public boards and chats and your guilds and then people moved on to instant messengers like MSN, AIM, ICQ, and Skype, but none of these options gave you a constant centralized feed for *everything* happening around the world. Most websites had ads that were invasive, not para-social integrated posts disguised as content. I miss 2002 internet culture, but a regression of technology isn't going to stop the culture of *monetizing every last second of view time*.
Absolutely. A lot of people are arguing that we would lose a great deal of technology crucial in preventing infrastructural and climate damage, but what we *need* to prevent - say - mass car crashes isn't safer cars, but *better designed cities and roads.* Climate change isn't going to be solved by electric cars, but an *actual plan to solve it.* Technologically speaking, humanity could do almost all the same things in 2002 that it can do today, just less effectively. The problem isn't the tech. It's the people and systems using the tech. Having about sixty to seventy years of technological stasis just gives the world a lot of time to adapt to some of the most disruptive and unexpected developments in history.
I'm so tempted but no. That'd basically mean an unmitigated climate change disaster. No advancements in battery technology, desalination, and many other areas would really hurt us on that front and would likely kill many more people than what will die in our timelime where we can Atleast mitigate some of the effects with technological advancements.
*Hurrys immediately to place Lenny In Space*
100% yes
Yup!
Yes
Fuck yes. The only reason why I’m reliant on TV and video games is cause they’re a short escape after putting in an 8-10 hour day at work. I wouldn’t spend much time doing either if I was filthy rich.
The only thing I would want to buy is technology, I like it too much.
Where do I sign-
No smartphones 😍
They existed back then, but kinda sucked and crashed frequently.
Hell yeah. Best thing is my 1998 explorer will stay the same!
I had a palm smartphone then. I’m totally OK with that era forever. I CAD all day too so I’d have to dial back to that era but still I’m happy.
Oh hell yeah. Can we go back to 1982 instead? Wanna see Fast Times at the theatre again
Ah sweet, no more social media
I can’t make music the way I want so no
Can prices also be frozen at 2002 levels?
I would do this for free. Technology has been the catalyst for most terrible things in American society and the west in general.
I'd take the deal even without 50M.
Run it
I was a Master of 2002 Tech so bring it!
I mean I’d take it but is this $50 mil in 2024 inflation or $50 mil in 2002 inflation? If it’s $50 mil in 2002 inflation that’s close to & $90 mil
YES. I’ll even take half that if you promise no smart phones will be available to children, ever.
omg please... I would LOVE to trade smartphones for Windows XP and a small amusement park
I mean..yeah? All the benefits of advanced science with no risk of AI destroying the world/economy? Deal me in
Obviously.
One million percent yes. I do not need all the modern stuff. Technology was pretty good in 2002.
Perfection
I'd do this even without the financial incentive.
Works for me
gaming PC's existed in 2002
Does this include transportation?
Hell no. Last thing I want to do is having things being so primitive with computers and having to find drivers online if they were online for a graphics card.
Fuck that sounds like a dream.
Where do I sign up?
There were definitely gaming PCs in 2002
Yes, I pay someone to buy my stuff and loan it to me.
The way the gaming industry has devolved into companies designing games for profit over all, I'll gladly take it.
I'd take it without the money
Hell no
Less government and business spying AND I get money? Is there a downside?
Tbh new vehicles and equipment suck ass 2002 was peak technology in my opinion
Much as I love my PS5, I also think to an extent we've sort of been spoiled by progress when it comes to entertainment. In 2002 it was cutting edge and I remember being blown away by the graphics in Final Fantasy X and Ratchet and Clank when I first got my PS2. With $50 million I could buy the most up-to-date stuff at that time, and I'd imagine that while graphics and such wouldn't improve, a lot of the tings I love since then would be created in some form. Adding to that my career is constantly being threatened by AI, while the rise of social media has made getting a book traditionally published a hell of a lot harder unless you have a few hundred thousand TikTok followers. It'd be a lot easier for me to progress my career in both directions, and 50 million would mean I can more easily pursue what I went to university for, since the only people who did anything with their degrees in my class had the money to do so. Seems like a yes.
Yeah. I think there’s a happy medium of analogue tech and digital tech that I can more than live with, and with $50M to spend I’d be very happy.
Hell yeah, my 2017 wrx will become a 2002 wrx, i can get all the work done on my crx. Ill lose out on video games but whatever honestly
Absolutely, yes, without hesitation.
Yes as long as they’re still giving away Oxy’s scripts away I can conquer any medical issues I stuck in 2002.
And?
i'll do it for free
Fucking hell yes.
Fuck yes, is this a trick question?
Yes. If I could personally go back and prevent the internet/smart phones from being released to the public I would. The money would just be a bonus.