For me it’s Open Source AGI not controlled by the enshittifying power of capital

  • SavvyWolf
    link
    fedilink
    English
    501 month ago

    I’d like to see fusion power (or some other good power source) become a thing. It’d be nice to live in a society where energy usage was basically safe and free.

    If we’re being unrealistic, easy access to ftl spacecraft for everyone would be nice. Exploring the galaxy sounds fun.

    • @merari42OP
      link
      71 month ago

      The last time I checked fusion was …check notes… just about fifty years away.

      • @davidgro
        link
        71 month ago

        For the last 40 years it’s been down to 20 years away.

        • gregorum
          link
          fedilink
          English
          6
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          Well, that was mostly right— until we actually built one. Now we’ve built 3 fusion reactors. It’s no longer theoretical.

          Now comes the phase of overcoming certain limitations wrt scaling up the tech to make commercially-viable reactors, and estimating that at about another 15-20 years (considering the rapid advances of the last few years) isn’t unrealistic.

          Before it was a question of, “can we even do this?” We’re finally past that milestone. Now it just a matter of the very achievable goal of scaling up the reactors. The timeline for that is much more predictable.

          • @davidgro
            link
            41 month ago

            Those scaling issues have always been the issues. We’ve had working reactors for over 65 years.

            “The first experiment to achieve controlled thermonuclear fusion was accomplished using Scylla at LANL in 1958.”

            And don’t think that the NIF ignition results are the kind of breakthrough that headlines make it out to be - that project is weapons research, and is not designed to produce power, nor is it anywhere close to doing so when the power to the lasers is measured and not just what the pellet absorbs.

            However, what’s new in the last few years is commercial investment in fusion, and I do think that it will make the difference that the last 65 years haven’t. Maybe even in the next 20 years™

              • @davidgro
                link
                41 month ago

                You’ve been taken in by intentionally deceptive headlines.
                The energy absorbed by the pellet (what they are measuring as the “input”) is something like 1/20th or worse of the energy used to power the lasers. The output is greater than that “input” by a little, but again, nowhere near the actual energy used, and it won’t ever be at that experiment because it’s not designed for it, it’s designed so we can simulate H-bombs without setting off real ones.

          • @Feathercrown
            link
            English
            11 month ago

            The next major goal is still overall energy-positive output, right? We’ve only breached the threshold of output > input naively, without considering any external energy costs. I hope we get there though, it would be very neat!

            • gregorum
              link
              fedilink
              English
              1
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              Oh, no, we’ve managed net positive! That was the most critical achievement, and we finally did it last year! Not a whole lot, but we have. The problems we’re encountering now is dealing with the massive heat produced. But we just hit a new milestone in dealing with that, too!

              Progress is being made, and that’s (the heat) is one of the biggest factors now in scaling up. But it’s an achievable goal. The more heat we can handle during the reaction, the bigger reactors we can build.

    • @Feathercrown
      link
      English
      0
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      What’s funny is that we DO have access to fairly clean energy already! Nuclear and renewables (not as much solar, until we solve the rare earth metals problem) are pretty darn clean. I mean… have you looked up Thoroum reactors? Those things are really neat, much safer and better for the environment, etc., but came just a bit too late combined with the nuclear scare.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      111 month ago

      He said “technological” advancement, not “political”. I think the greed and slow politics is what is holding us back here, not technology.

  • promitheas
    link
    fedilink
    211 month ago

    Evidence of life elsewhere in the universe. It would be so cool. I just hope its far enough we cant get there and fuck everything up for them (or that they cant do the same to us)

    • @merari42OP
      link
      51 month ago

      Perhaps we call them and it takes 400 years for them to get here and fuck things up.

  • @BallsandBayonets
    link
    211 month ago

    Lab-grown meat that is both indistinguishable from animal-grown and is cheaper. Bonus points if they can make bacon have 100% of our daily vitamins and minerals.

    • AToM.exe
      link
      ދިވެހި
      41 month ago

      Sustained net positiv fusion.

      It’s plausible that we’ll see it in our lifetime.

    • @t_berium
      link
      21 month ago

      That’s the first thing that comes into my mind when people say ‘you can’t spend that much money’, when thinking of being a billionaire.

      I would finance the living shit out of fusion technology. You know. For mankind and such.

  • Fake4000
    link
    English
    151 month ago

    Sending someone to mars and keeping an eye on how he lives his life and survives.

    Would feel like a survival game let’s play.

  • @morphballganon
    link
    131 month ago

    Flexible, plug-n-play solar energy capture methods with more versatile applications than inside aluminum frames glued to huge hunks of glass.

    Like, a paint. I could just paint the south side of my house with the stuff and it handles my electricity demand.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    111 month ago

    Room temperature superconductors. Not for any of the particular uses per se, but just because the world would go nuts and it would be interesting to see.

  • Michael Ten
    link
    101 month ago

    Defeating aging.

    Read the book Ending Aging by Aubrey de Grey…

    Limitless Peace

    • @Num10ck
      link
      English
      -11 month ago

      so no more inheritance? no more younger generations getting their turn to control things? sounds like a nightmare scenario.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        101 month ago

        The previous poster spoke about defeating aging, not death.

        I mean if we kept the same lifespan as we have today, but everyone basically stopped aging at 35, you keep the energy and clarity of mind all throughout your life, but still die at 82 or whatever, I’d call that a win.

      • Michael Ten
        link
        21 month ago

        Maybe think more creatively and not with a scarcity oriented pro-aging mindset. Limitless peace.

  • @Cyberflunk
    link
    91 month ago

    That god is a chemically sustained illusion, and the dismantling of religion.

  • @Treczoks
    link
    91 month ago

    Fusion reactors that produce all the (electrical) power we need.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      21 month ago

      This is the big one. With infinite energy you can basically do matter transmutation and end most forms of commodity scarcity.

      • @Cocodapuf
        link
        1
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        I think the “promise” of fusion is a huge misunderstanding.

        I mean we already have a nearly infinite source of clean energy, it’s called fission. The only difference between fission and fusion is that fusion will be much more expensive.

        If you want a truly unlimited source of energy, we have those too, they’re wind and solar.

        Seriously though, the expectations for fusion are completely rediculous, when we finally do get it working, it will be the most expensive form of energy ever concieved. If the reactors use the standard method of generating energy, heat capture to run a turbine, it will also require enormous amounts of beryllium as part of the “blanket” around the reactor. How much beryllium will be needed? In the whole world, we probably have enough beryllium for 4 grid scale reactors, the cost of which would be astronomical.

        Here’s the worst part, over time those blankets would absorb neutrons, the materials would degrade and eventually the now radioactive blanket would have to be disposed of and replaced.

        The tldr is this - tokamak and stellerator style fusion reactors work great in theory, they will probably successfully make sustainable fusion reactions quite soon. But they may never generate electricity in practice, they’re a logistical and economical nightmare.

        I do think fusion could make a fantastic spacecraft engine however, I expect that will be a huge application.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    91 month ago

    I want to see wide-spread adoption of organ transplants using decellularization. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decellularization

    A 3d printer in every home and a larger one in each neighbourhood. Design our own stuff instead of buying garbage that falls apart.

    A self-hosted AI, which isn’t controlled by any bigtech company, would be pretty sweet.

    The end of surveillance capitalism.

  • Dark Arc
    link
    fedilink
    English
    81 month ago

    Hyper compact batteries, that would change everything overnight