| ▲ | rokhayakebe 5 hours ago |
| *What do you think the world will look like in 2025
TALKIE-1930* According to a forecast by an eminent statistician, the world will, in 2025, support a population of 6,600,000,000. All Europe will be one vast network of railways, and travellers will be able to go from London to Constantinople in forty hours, and from London to Peking in a week. The globe will be girdled with telegraph wires, and messages will be sent from New York to Calcutta in a few minutes. The Atlantic will be crossed in four days, and the voyage to Australia will be accomplished in a month. In 2025, mankind will be united by spoken language, and one uniform currency will be adopted by all nations. In that era, also, universal peace may be expected, for standing armies will have become obsolete, and the art of war will be forgotten. The earth will yield nourishment to its inhabitants in abundance, for waste lands will have been reclaimed, and the deserts will be made fertile. The bowels of the earth will have been completely explored, and coal and metals will no longer be dug from the quarry. The great coal fields will have become exhausted, and an universal scarcity of fuel will compel men to turn their attention to other sources of heat. For a time, chemical agency will be tried, but in the end, recourse will be had to the sun's rays, and the power of waterfalls will be made available for all purposes of life. The earth will have been thoroughly drained, and malarious diseases will be unknown. The art of healing will have been simplified, and diseases will be cured speedily and surely. Ignorance will no longer be suffered to exist, and elementary knowledge will be imparted to all. Then, too, will commence an era of good taste. Architecture will be freed from ugliness, sculpture will be disentangled from barbarism, and painting will cease to be hideous. Music will no longer be discord, and poetry will be something better than.. |
|
| ▲ | palmotea 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| > and travellers will be able to go from London to Constantinople in forty hours By the 1930s, Constantinople been a long time gone. It had been Istanbul not Constantinople for centuries by that point. |
| |
| ▲ | dtech 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Many nations/languages did not respect that rename until Turkey became an ally in the 20th century. | | |
| ▲ | jhbadger 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Yeah - listen to the narrator in the opening on the classic Orson Welles film The Third Man (1949) - he says he never cared much for Vienna before the War, preferring the scene in Constantinople instead. | | |
| |
| ▲ | why_only_15 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The formal Ottoman name was Kostantiniyye=Constantinople until the empire's fall in 1922. The official shift happened in 1930, with the Turkish Postal Services Law changing the name to Istanbul. | |
| ▲ | snypher 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | That's nobody's business but the Turks. Why did Turkey become Türkiye but Japan didn't become Nippon (or vice-versa!)? It's all very confusing to me. | | |
| ▲ | dhosek 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Why did Turkey become Türkiye? I think mostly because they asked. I’m guessing that Japan/Nippon is enjoying the fact that English speakers use the Chinese name for Japan and the Sanskrit¹ name for China. It’s much like the Czech Republic became Czechia, although part of that was Czech speakers wanting to stop referring to their country as an adjective² (the Czech phrase for Czech Republic was often shortened to just Czech). ⸻ 1. As a kid, my dad had told me that China was the Japanese name for the country, but according to Wikipedia, the name is actually derived from Sanskrit. 2. Which reminds me of the fun challenge of Czech (and many other Slavic languages) is that unlike other Indo-European languages³, the declensions of adjectives follow a different pattern than the declensions of their corresponding nouns, 3. Or at least the Indo-European languages that I have familiarity with. | | |
| ▲ | invalidusernam3 an hour ago | parent [-] | | Czech Republic didn't become Czechia, it's still called Czech Republic. Czechia is just the official English short name. |
| |
| ▲ | oofdere 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Turks did not really want it to become Türkiye in English, it was a government push. Most of us prefer having the name of our country be pronounceable and writable by anyone talking about it, and no one will even notice if you call it Turkey. | |
| ▲ | testfoobar 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | People just liked it better that way. | |
| ▲ | petesergeant 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The answer is as simple as “they asked nicely” |
| |
| ▲ | codeulike 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Why did Constantinople get the works? | |
| ▲ | wazoox an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | It was the official name of Istanbul up until 1930 (in Turkish, Kostantiniyye). |
|
|
| ▲ | eranation 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Very beautiful, and very sad. |
| |
| ▲ | BoorishBears 36 minutes ago | parent [-] | | My glass half-full reading is that this shows things aren't so bad right now. LLM aside, it tracks that with a civilization in truly dire straits, portrayal of the future would trend increasingly more towards being positive and fanciful: because at some point things would be so bad, that imagining the future will be even worse becomes a deadly thing for the modicum of hope required to even stay alive, let alone push forward. I personally always think we have a lot of fat to trim before we get there. Our descendents can have a wonderful quality of life even if a lot of institutions and supply chains regress. The era of summoning food from a handheld computer might go away and we'll still be pretty well off (if not strictly better off) |
|
|
| ▲ | ra 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I want to live in that world. |
| |
| ▲ | awhitby 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Perhaps my reading is coloured by optimism but by my count, apart from peace, language, currency and (debatably) universal good taste, all of which seem a bit utopian (so maybe I’m a cynical optimist) we do—or are well on our way. | | |
|
|
| ▲ | ilqr_jb 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| That is quite beautiful. I do think, though, that all these futuristic visions from maybe the 1920s and 1950s do kind of implicitly reject this dialectic, or oscillating toward something instead in favor of this exponential growth of the optimal solution (like alternative energy) immediately taking over. But we'll get there one day. |
|
| ▲ | mc3301 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| This is beautiful. |
|
| ▲ | kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| > Ignorance will no longer be suffered to exist, and elementary knowledge will be imparted to all. Oh good, for a moment I didn't think reeducation camps were in our future. > Architecture will be freed from ugliness Uh, friend, I have some bad news... |
