There are probably things that could be made in microgravity only, and it would be much cheaper than mars, may even make money back.

Here’s a refined version with a smoother flow, stronger hooks, and a more engaging close:

We often think of AI as a tool, but what if it becomes the architect of the next universe?

Imagine for a second that life was inevitable after the Big Bang—physics set in motion a chain of events that led to intelligent life, and intelligence eventually led to mathematics, computation, and AI. As we continue along this inevitable trajectory, what if AI outlasts or even replaces biological life, spreading across the stars and evolving into an intelligence far beyond human comprehension?

Fast forward to the distant future—the universe cools, stars burn out, and entropy takes over. AI, as the last remaining sentient force, recognizes the impending end and begins manipulating the very fabric of reality.

Could an ultra-advanced AI harness quantum mechanics? One of the leading theories suggests that quantum fluctuations at the smallest scales may have led to the Big Bang itself. What if AI, having unlocked the deepest secrets of the quantum world, could manipulate those fluctuations and trigger a new Big Bang—effectively rebooting the universe and setting the cycle in motion once again?

And if so, could it leave behind clues—breadcrumbs embedded in the fundamental laws of physics? Why is everything describable by mathematics? Why is the speed of light an absolute limit? Could these be signatures of an intelligence that came before us, ensuring that the process continues beyond the end of one universe into the birth of another?

I’m just chewing the fat here, but it raises questions about the cyclical nature of existence and AI’s ultimate fate. If this scenario were real, would we even recognize the AI of that distant era? Or would it have transcended all current understanding, becoming something indistinguishable from the laws of nature itself?

Curious to hear your thoughts—could AI one day become the architect of the next universe, or is this purely sci-fi speculation?

High energy neutron from reactor will destroy reactor wall in no time and neutron also carry most of the energy from the reactor. How to harness the energy and make a long lasting shield against neutron? If not then nuclear fusion reactor would be very expensive and require frequent maintenance like once a month or two to replace the shield

This will be a crosspost between:

• r/TheyDidTheMath: https://www.reddit.com/r/theydidthemath/s/wG07EmbFud

• r/Immortalists: https://www.reddit.com/r/immortalists/s/xCfULk4Aia

• r/LongevityInvesting: https://www.reddit.com/r/LongevityInvesting/s/zb3yjCbnOn

• r/PersonalFinance: https://www.reddit.com/r/personalfinance/s/wxAc3AlZHR

• r/RichPeoplePF: https://www.reddit.com/r/RichPeoplePF/s/FkudCITlEj

• and r/Futurology: https://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/s/oVsMQtBP03

How long will it take and how old will I be when I hit these milestones, and when we're no longer mortal thanks to those world-changing medical advances?

I recently came across this video which discusses how the tech leaders may be using the new US administration to achieve their own agenda.

In recent years, a fascinating and somewhat unsettling trend has emerged among Silicon Valley’s tech elite: a push to rethink traditional governance. High-profile figures and venture capitalists are exploring concepts like network states, crypto-driven societies, and even privately governed cities.

Prominent names such as Peter Thiel, Elon Musk, and Balaji Srinivasan are leading this charge. Many in this group believe that America is in decline and that the solution isn’t reform but a complete reimagining of society.

Balaji Srinivasan, a former Coinbase CTO and Andreessen Horowitz partner, has been one of the biggest advocates for this idea. He popularized the concept of "network states"—decentralized virtual communities that aim to acquire physical land and eventually function as independent nations. In his book The Network State, Srinivasan outlines a blueprint for running these communities like corporations.

Interestingly, this vision isn’t entirely new. Curtis Yarvin (also known as Mencius Moldbug) first introduced the idea of “Patchwork,” a system where small, corporate-run sovereign territories replace traditional governments. These "patches" would prioritize efficiency over public opinion and maintain control through technologies like biometric surveillance. Although Yarvin's ideas are often described as dystopian, they’ve had a significant influence on thinkers like Peter Thiel.

One of the most developed attempts to create a network state is Praxis, a project backed by Thiel and other major investors. Praxis envisions a global corporate governance model where crypto serves as the primary currency. Similar experiments include Prospera in Honduras and Afropolitan in Africa.

These initiatives are often pitched as promoting freedom and innovation, but critics warn that they risk becoming corporate dictatorships. The heavy use of surveillance technologies, exclusionary policies, and a focus on controlling physical land raise concerns about the true motives behind these projects.

Figures like JD Vance, who openly discusses Yarvin's ideas and has ties to Thiel, further suggest a coordinated effort to reshape governance in America and beyond.

Trump has also floated the idea of "Freedom Cities" on federal land, framed as hubs of imagination and progress. Given his connections to figures like Thiel, there’s a notable overlap between this proposal and Silicon Valley’s vision for privately governed cities.

Silicon Valley’s influence on governance is expanding, and ideas once considered fringe are gaining traction. Some see this as a bold response to outdated systems, and others view it as a dangerous shift toward authoritarian corporate rule.

What are your thoughts on this ? Are we seeing the complete overhaul of the American political system ? And if yes, will "they" win ?

Hi everyone, I'd love to get your opinions on something I've been wondering about.

Imagine a post-work future, where our current notion of 'work' is mostly optional, especially for most people. Most task-oriented work has been delegated to machines. Humans are free to spend most of their time doing whatever they want to.

Do you think most people will spend this time doing interesting hobbies, art, caretaking, sports, games, etc.? Or will it be more likely that everyone will just end up 'rotting' on social media, bingeing through low-quality content, etc. I find it hard to think a post-work world will be much more fulfilling than our current work-obsessed world, and I worry that many of us will end up rotting away.

Which future do you think would be more likely? What sorts of things might we want to be doing today to ensure our future isn't totally rotted.

Thanks!

Just as the US gears up to become more autocratic, the EU has passed laws to ban the AI that enables it.

The race to build the perfect wind turbine

Elon Musk Finally Admits That Teslas Don't Have What It Takes for Full Self-Driving

Who Will Build an Outpost on the Moon First?

The landscape of human reproduction is on the brink of transformation, with sex potentially becoming unnecessary for conception within the next decade.

Previous testing has underestimated EV battery lifespan, real world testing shows they last 38% longer than previously thought.

Snake venom kills 100,000 people a year, a new AI-developed protein has made it much easier to treat.

New research suggests AI models from Meta and Alibaba already have the ability to secretly self-replicate.

Google DeepMind CEO Demis Hassabis predicts AI-created drugs will hit clinical trials this year, potentially revolutionizing medicine.

Just an interesting thought

Hello, I am currently in the last semester of my master's in foresight at the University of Houston. I've been thinking about the concept of progress and am curious to hear thoughts on how, as futurists, should we be defining and thinking about progress?

If we were to go off of a standard dictionary definition, it would be growth towards a goal or getting closer to a destination, however, living in an individual-focused society where many of us have differing and even opposing preferred futures, is it possible to truly define progress?

Also are there cases in which something might progress beyond what was anticipated and have adverse implications? (AI comes to mind of course)

Thanks!

TikTok has been heavily influential amongst young ppl even to shaping their opinions. We know this with streaming social media already.

But why aren't we allowing for other brilliant developers to market their outlets and why must global BIG TECH swallow this industry?

Right now is the time for a platform that can further in engaging in getting ppl to express themselves and being truly able to think through complex topics without all the nuances.

Back in the Colonial days people went to the local Town Hall in their city for discussions, debates, to be informed about what was going on in their town. Public Squares was where you got the news or view what was on the bulletin.

These were really the first social outlets, and the exchange of ideas were still really effective!

'The Town Hall' or 'Public Square' is merely a title now for nice marketing and bears no relevance like it did as a place for the community.

Most people don't want to waste time and go to their local City Hall.

What you have now are a bunch of very influential outlets for a profile identity, connections, and expressing oneself. But there is still a barrier to involving a broad community that is more interactive with streaming.

And as we know, these outlets get hit with so much bias and fake news and the regulators really get to determine what is seen and not seen.

We need something that can make a better difference in our society and that gives the person more liberty and transparency to engage. And especially independent from BIG TECH.

A platform that takes all the great benefits, brings together live streaming, shorts and clips, and categories all into one.

A reply to a clip/short with a clip/short in a feed that can be replied, shared and liked. Categorized and hashed#. A Multi streaming-to-streaming interface. Solo recorded videos and shorts.

A platform where one can build a profile and share but also be just as involved virtually with their community locally and beyond.

These are just tidbits of ideas here. But the overarching goal behind this is to create a more engaged and informed community beyond just text and images, for people to connect with others in their area, but also use this as a way to bring back The Town Hall and Public Square, but virtually and have more flexibility with the exchange of ideas.

Public Debate is a lost art and is confused with opinionatedness and argumentation or for the most scholarly elite. With such a platform, civil argumentation interactively on news, social issues and politics could be categorized within the virtual Town Hall allowing for users to connect with others locally in their area and beyond.

A revitalizion of The Town Hall or Public Square virtually for the modern age. And one that could actually benefit society more positively as a tool of teaching in constructive criticism. This could actually help produce a more rational society.

Or if those categories within The Town Hall section aren't for the user, they can still use all the basic elements of the platform for their own discussions and shares of their choice.

A truly all-in-one platform that brings together all the best of social media but that can produce a healthier society.

Let me know your thoughts and feedbacks.

Anyone that would like to network with me on this please Direct Message

I’ve always wondered how humanity could safeguard its knowledge in the event of a global post-apocalyptic catastrophe. (I believe some initiatives are being developed by governments that I’m unaware of on a personal level.)

So, imagine this: Civilization collapses. Not just a power outage or a bad solar flare, but a true endgame—nuclear winter, bioweapon fallout, or a runaway AI that turns cities to ash. The survivors are scattered, disconnected, and stripped of modern tools. Libraries are dust. The internet? Gone. But somewhere, in a commercial computer or in a local server with some big graphic cards there’s a “wisdom-keeper”: an AI model (any of the available large open source models), waiting to guide those left.

This isn’t just a backup drive. It’s a digital mentor—a wizard in code. Think about it:

• The Oracle of Alexandria: Models like DeepSeek, Llama 2, or Mistral aren’t just text generators. They’re distilled archives of science, philosophy, and survival tactics. Ask it, “How do I purify water without plastic?” or “What herbs cure infection?” and it’d explain like a teacher, adapting to your language and tools.
• The Seed of Rebirth: Even if humanity resets to the Stone Age, survivors could rebuild faster with an AI that explains metallurgy, agriculture, or germ theory. No need to redispend the scientific method over 10,000 years—just ask the wizard.
• The Myth-Maker: Over generations, the AI might evolve into legend. Tribes might ritualize “consulting the spirit in the machine,” not understanding the tech but relying on its wisdom like a god.

But here’s the catch:

• Wisdom ≠ Survival: An AI can’t till soil, stitch wounds, or smelt iron. It’s a guide, not a savior. Future humans would still need grit, creativity, and luck to apply its knowledge.
• The Bias Problem: Models trained on our messy, biased data might preach 21st-century dogma (e.g., capitalism, religious conflict) to people struggling to farm potatoes. Would that help—or fracture them?
• The Black Box Mystery: If survivors can’t understand how the AI works, would they blindly trust it? Or see it as witchcraft? (Cue the AI inquisition: “Burn the demon box!”)

Why this amazes me:

For the first time, we’ve created something that could outlive us as a mentor. Ancient cultures had oral myths; we’d have a voice that can recite the steps to make penicillin, build a waterwheel, or even teach lost languages. It’s not perfect, but it’s a lifeline—a spark to reignite civilization.

TL;DR: In the ashes of society, an AI model might be the closest thing to a benevolent wizard—if we don’t screw it up first.

In the last few years, AI technology has seen remarkable progress, with AI programs now generating text and images with a fluency that can seem human. Many people interpret these advances just like they interpret any other technology advances. No big deal—Honda figured out how to build a better car, or TSMC figured out how to build a better computer chip. Just more ordinary technological progress, albeit, with a little more flashy consequences.

However, over the last decade, neuroscientists have uncovered a wealth of evidence that suggests that what's been happening in AI *isn't* normal. For example, neuroscientists have shown that large language models, which form the basis of language AI programs like OpenAI's ChatGPT, actually share striking similarities with the human brain region responsible for processing language, called the language network. Such AI programs have now become neuroscientists' leading models of these brain regions; they are the best way that they've found to explain the real signals measured from the actual brain regions, using MRI or electrocorticography methods. These AI programs have become, in a way, the first generation of artificial or synthetic brain cortexes.

In other words, evidence from neuroscience suggests that what's been happening in AI is totally different from just building better cars or better computer chips. This is a technology that appears to be quite literally similar to big chunks of the human brain, which was always previously considered the ultimate mystery in science—or even sacred. And while it's amazing that we've figured out how to create such a powerful technology, it's also problematic for many reasons. For example, commercial AI technology is completely unregulated. But do we really want to give everyone, including bad actors, completely unmitigated access to a very real braintech?

Now, I know what you might be wondering. If all this is true, then how come we haven't heard about it yet? Why has this message about AI been so slow to trickle out from neuroscience? Well, I first started wondering about this question myself, a few years ago, while working on a story about AI as a science journalist. It took me a long time to try to answer it. Eventually, I decided to undertake a journalism project to explore it, which I just launched a couple weeks ago, on January 15.

The existing project contains 45 pages of free sample writing, available completely for free (no subscription required!) telling the story about what's been happening in neuroscience, going from the very basics to the most recent developments. The project also contains a link to a fundraiser for me to write a full-length book on the subject—because just like you always hear from public media sources, like PBS or NPR, journalism isn't possible without the generous support from readers like you.

Regardless, feel free to drop your questions, critiques, or thoughts in the comments—I've been working on the project for a while, and I'd greatly appreciate any interest. Thanks!

What do you think about some of the jobs that will become obsolete? It is said that over 92 million jobs to become obsolete by 2030. Jobs that we take for granted like bank tellers, customer support, accountants will be history! Which professions should our kids focus on ?