What do you think?
Rate this book
Tomorrowland: Our Staggering Journey From Science Fiction To Science Fact
New York Times, Wired, Atlantic Monthly, Discover bestselling author Steven Kotler has written extensively about those pivotal moments when science fiction became science fact…and fundamentally reshaped the world. Now he gathers the best of his best, updated and expanded upon, to guide readers on a mind-bending tour of the far frontier, and how these advances are radically transforming our lives. From the ways science and technology are fundamentally altering our bodies and our world (the world’s first bionic soldier, the future of evolution) to those explosive collisions between science and culture (life extension and bioweapons), we’re crossing moral and ethical lines we’ve never faced before.
As Kotler writes, “Life is tricky sport—and that's the emotional core of this story, the real reason we can’t put Pandora back in the box. When you strip everything else away, technology is nothing more than the promise of an easier tomorrow. It’s the promise of hope. And how do you stop hope?”
Join Kotler in this fascinating exploration of our incredible next: a deep dive into those future technologies happening now—and what it means to be a part of this brave new world.
As Kotler writes, “Life is tricky sport—and that's the emotional core of this story, the real reason we can’t put Pandora back in the box. When you strip everything else away, technology is nothing more than the promise of an easier tomorrow. It’s the promise of hope. And how do you stop hope?”
Join Kotler in this fascinating exploration of our incredible next: a deep dive into those future technologies happening now—and what it means to be a part of this brave new world.
306 pages, Paperback
First published May 12, 2015
921 people are currently reading
3486 people want to read
About the author
Steven Kotler
34 books1,105 followersSteven Kotler is a New York Times bestselling author, award-winning journalist, and co-founder and director of research for the Flow Genome Project. His books include the non-fiction works "The Rise of Superman," "Abundance," "A Small Furry Prayer" "West of Jesus," and the novel "The Angle Quickest for Flight." His work has been translated into more than 30 languages. His articles have appeared in over 60 publications, including The New York Times Magazine, The Atlantic Monthly, Wired, GQ, Outside, Popular Science, Men's Journal and Discover.
He also writes "Far Frontiers," a blog about technology and innovation for Forbes.com and "The Playing Field," a blog about the science of sport and culture for PsychologyToday.com.
He lives in New Mexico with his wife, the author Joy Nicholson.
He also writes "Far Frontiers," a blog about technology and innovation for Forbes.com and "The Playing Field," a blog about the science of sport and culture for PsychologyToday.com.
He lives in New Mexico with his wife, the author Joy Nicholson.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 119 reviews
March 9, 2018
Some interesting topics, from growing kidneys to developing Geordi's VISOR from Star Trek, but I was not impressed at all with the author's grounding as a science journalist. Trust and regard sailed out the window when he hailed the average increase of height and bodymass following industrialism as proof that humans can evolve much more quickly than previously expected. Um...no, that's proof that our present geneset can do more when it has better materials to work with, i.e more access to different kinds of food, and less work to do fighting off vicious diseases. Have the South Koreans evolved past their primitive ancestors in the north, or are their shorter northern cousins just malnourished? Kotler also referred to a cure for cancer as a vaccine. Cancer isn't a microbe you fight off with antibodies! Sure, maybe he was dumbing things down to increase potential readership, but forgive me if I don't take the chapter on medicinal ecstasy too seriously after that..
This is not on the level of Michio Kaku. It's more like a collection of Newsweek fluff pieces.
This is not on the level of Michio Kaku. It's more like a collection of Newsweek fluff pieces.
July 21, 2015
I wanted to like this book, but it is a very pithy, unscientific and shallow collection of case studies on a few emerging technologies such as new types of nuclear power, artificial vision, and (theoretically) meteor mining. I became truly annoyed with the chapter on stem cells, which was clearly written sometime around 2008, as if nothing had happened in the seven years since this book was published. There is nothing profound here, move along people....
November 21, 2022
This was an informative read, one which is likely already on its way to being outdated, as is the way of technology, but which is firmly grounded in research so that you still get a great sense of what's happening and what is going to happen across multiple and important areas of humanity, society, and living. I found the last two articles especially eye-opening, one dealing with synbio and one dealing with gamate donation centres.
Although Kotler at times uses phrases that come across as flip (like describing a child who was drowning as "seeing too much of the bottom of the pool"), the book reads with a logical and easy to digest flow. Technical terms are defined effectively. Credentials for cited experts are posted so one can do their own research if they want. I learned a lot from this book!
Although Kotler at times uses phrases that come across as flip (like describing a child who was drowning as "seeing too much of the bottom of the pool"), the book reads with a logical and easy to digest flow. Technical terms are defined effectively. Credentials for cited experts are posted so one can do their own research if they want. I learned a lot from this book!
December 19, 2020
I enjoyed this collection of the science of us, our future and the science fiction element of what we maybe able to achieve in the science of tomorrow.
I liked the case studies elements of this book although would have liked a little more science but it was still insightful and interesting nevertheless. I liked the interviews, the research compilations and the way the chapters were split up into chunks which stopped my brain from yawning.
I always judge these kind of books on whether they entertain and stop me from becoming bored with the content (which this one did. I found it really interesting), whether I learn anything new or pick up new information and I learnt a fair bit from this book that I didn’t previously know before and whether it’s delivered in an easy to understand way, which this was. Anyone who picked up this book would not struggle to understand even if they had a very lose grasp on science in general.
Whilst I think more science could have been used in this book, I still enjoyed the content and the book as a whole.
I liked the case studies elements of this book although would have liked a little more science but it was still insightful and interesting nevertheless. I liked the interviews, the research compilations and the way the chapters were split up into chunks which stopped my brain from yawning.
I always judge these kind of books on whether they entertain and stop me from becoming bored with the content (which this one did. I found it really interesting), whether I learn anything new or pick up new information and I learnt a fair bit from this book that I didn’t previously know before and whether it’s delivered in an easy to understand way, which this was. Anyone who picked up this book would not struggle to understand even if they had a very lose grasp on science in general.
Whilst I think more science could have been used in this book, I still enjoyed the content and the book as a whole.
February 25, 2021
є цікаві розділи, є такі які вже трохи outdated станом на 2021 (не сама тема а прогнози дані по ній). з того шо не сподобалось - деякі теми можна було скоротити і не повторювати одне і те ж по кілька разів а також відчуття що все, що робитьсь в рамках наукового прогресу - робиться в США (крім теми про дослідження стовбурових клітин).
August 17, 2022
A fun, alternately hopeful and terrifying book about the various ways science fiction is becoming (and has already become) reality, in transportation, health, reproductive technology, bioweapons, and elsewhere. The future is now, and it's awesome to see how we fit into it.
April 17, 2020
Great read
July 29, 2015
The main problem with this book is summed up in the introduction, where Steven Kotler waxes lyrical about the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) project in the south of France. “How far has hope taken us?” he muses. “From the very first time one of our primate progenitors sharpened a stick to a star. A freaking star. In a lab. Created by us. Let there be light.”
What Kotler does not mention is that the world’s largest nuclear fusion machine has already cost three times as much as budgeted ($20bn and counting), with the completion date now being shifted from 2016 to 2019. The production of ‘burning plasma’ is unlikely before the 2030s.
Being a long-time SF reader, I have an ambivalent attitude towards technology, an attitude I believe is shared by much of the genre’s writers and readers. It might come as a surprise to outsiders that SF stalwarts do not believe that technology is the be-all and end-all of humanity’s growing list of intractable hurdles.
The problem is that technology can never be neutral, as it is always enmeshed in an intricate weave of social and political issues, from government control, such as weaponisation, to moral and religious complexities, such as with cloning and gene splicing.
It is a pity that Kotler did not take his own maxim into account that “journalists tend to be cynical by nature and disbelieving by necessity.” He explains that this book is essentially a collection of articles he wrote between 2000 and 2014 for major publications such as the New York Times, Wired and Atlantic Monthly, which he subsequently updated for this book.
Such an approach shows, for there is little narrative continuity here, and only a tenuous exploration of the most interesting aspect: the impact of technology on what it means to be human. Granted this is not a technical or academic treatise, but rather a popular account for the layman who wishes to be updated on (some) of the latest scientific progress. Still, it is a pity that Kotler does not explore his ideas a bit further … which might have tempered some of the dewy-eyed optimism.
What Kotler does not mention is that the world’s largest nuclear fusion machine has already cost three times as much as budgeted ($20bn and counting), with the completion date now being shifted from 2016 to 2019. The production of ‘burning plasma’ is unlikely before the 2030s.
Being a long-time SF reader, I have an ambivalent attitude towards technology, an attitude I believe is shared by much of the genre’s writers and readers. It might come as a surprise to outsiders that SF stalwarts do not believe that technology is the be-all and end-all of humanity’s growing list of intractable hurdles.
The problem is that technology can never be neutral, as it is always enmeshed in an intricate weave of social and political issues, from government control, such as weaponisation, to moral and religious complexities, such as with cloning and gene splicing.
It is a pity that Kotler did not take his own maxim into account that “journalists tend to be cynical by nature and disbelieving by necessity.” He explains that this book is essentially a collection of articles he wrote between 2000 and 2014 for major publications such as the New York Times, Wired and Atlantic Monthly, which he subsequently updated for this book.
Such an approach shows, for there is little narrative continuity here, and only a tenuous exploration of the most interesting aspect: the impact of technology on what it means to be human. Granted this is not a technical or academic treatise, but rather a popular account for the layman who wishes to be updated on (some) of the latest scientific progress. Still, it is a pity that Kotler does not explore his ideas a bit further … which might have tempered some of the dewy-eyed optimism.
June 19, 2015
Put simply, this book is a great look at how many elements from science fiction have been transformed into present-day reality or science fact. Plus, of course, a look at how other items might become real and available in the future.
Written in an open, accessible manner the reader is taken on a fairly broad journey, dashing around scientific disciplines. You don’t need to be an expert, just a bit of curiosity and interest to learn is recommended.
The author splits the book into three main areas: the science fiction that is reality today, what the future probably will deliver and what it could deliver sometime in the uncertain future. All of this is packaged up into fairly short, easy-to-read chapters that drag you in and make you want to keep reading. An ideal book to read when travelling for the curious, if you will. The author’s enthusiasm for the subject shines through, yet this is not a sci-fi nerds unrealistic dream but a sensitive, evocative and knowledgeable look at the subject, all nicely weaved together and packaged into a keenly priced book.
This was an enjoyable read. A nice, unexpected find that is available for less than the cost of a couple of coffees at a high-street chain which can have something for almost everyone: even if they don’t yet know it.
Tomorrowland: Our Journey from Science Fiction to Science Fact, written by Steven Kotler and published by HMH New Harvest. ISBN 9780544456211, 304 pages. YYY
http://syndicate.darreningram.com/tom...
Written in an open, accessible manner the reader is taken on a fairly broad journey, dashing around scientific disciplines. You don’t need to be an expert, just a bit of curiosity and interest to learn is recommended.
The author splits the book into three main areas: the science fiction that is reality today, what the future probably will deliver and what it could deliver sometime in the uncertain future. All of this is packaged up into fairly short, easy-to-read chapters that drag you in and make you want to keep reading. An ideal book to read when travelling for the curious, if you will. The author’s enthusiasm for the subject shines through, yet this is not a sci-fi nerds unrealistic dream but a sensitive, evocative and knowledgeable look at the subject, all nicely weaved together and packaged into a keenly priced book.
This was an enjoyable read. A nice, unexpected find that is available for less than the cost of a couple of coffees at a high-street chain which can have something for almost everyone: even if they don’t yet know it.
Tomorrowland: Our Journey from Science Fiction to Science Fact, written by Steven Kotler and published by HMH New Harvest. ISBN 9780544456211, 304 pages. YYY
http://syndicate.darreningram.com/tom...
October 31, 2015
I just watched Back to the Future II and according to that movie we should already have legit flying cars, personal fusion devices that utilize garbage for fuel, and rejuvenation clinics that can make your entire body 20 years younger. Or maybe Doc Brown brought all that stuff from even further in the future than 2015. The cars were all flying, I definitely remember that. If Doc landed in the real 2015 he'd be terrified, zoom back to 1955, and blow up the time machine thinking "Those poor bastards haven't even come close to developing hoverboards!"
Kotler's book does have some really interesting stuff in it, especially when it comes to medical science. He starts with the advances made in prosthetics (unfortunately receiving more attention due to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan but at least someone will benefit). This is followed by sections on visual implants, genetically enhanced mosquitoes, terraforming of the Everglades, and the virtues of steroids until stem cell-based therapies come available. All great and really interesting stuff.
I was just really disappointed that the closest we've come to a flying car (according to the book) is basically a motorcycle/helicopter hybrid available in a kit.
Kotler's book does have some really interesting stuff in it, especially when it comes to medical science. He starts with the advances made in prosthetics (unfortunately receiving more attention due to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan but at least someone will benefit). This is followed by sections on visual implants, genetically enhanced mosquitoes, terraforming of the Everglades, and the virtues of steroids until stem cell-based therapies come available. All great and really interesting stuff.
I was just really disappointed that the closest we've come to a flying car (according to the book) is basically a motorcycle/helicopter hybrid available in a kit.
Read
July 20, 2015I was unimpressed with the level of scientific analysis in this book. The chapter on "evolution" conflated evolutionary change with an example that illustrates instead the often variable phenotypic expression of the genome resulting from differing environments. The counter argument to how large the average humans who are measured have become in the 21st century is the data on military recruits in the second world war. 40% of these teenagers were rejected for service because they failed the minimum standards for height and weight. The guidelines were a recruit must weigh at least 120 pounds and be 5 feet tall. That 40% of recruits were rejected by this standard spoke to the destitute world and near starvation diets of the depression.
The major disappointment with the book was the lack of literary fiction references for science fiction contrivance that have found their way into our lives. Star Trek alone gave us the proximity opening doors, the flip phone and hand held diagnostic devices.
This just wasn't what I expected.
The major disappointment with the book was the lack of literary fiction references for science fiction contrivance that have found their way into our lives. Star Trek alone gave us the proximity opening doors, the flip phone and hand held diagnostic devices.
This just wasn't what I expected.
July 13, 2016
I have to admit that this book wasn't what I thought it would be when I bought it. I often like to look at GR reviews before I buy a book (often, not always) and there were some cautionary warnings. But, for me, this had a lot of new information even though I do try to keep up with our rapidly changing world. I do understand that if you are well versed in a field that he writes about you will find the information well known to you.
My expectation was a little more techy considering the SciFi reference in the title. But I don't mind surprises when they turn out, at least for me, to be this good even though some of what he talks about is downright scary.
Some of the covered areas: Bionic men,Immortality, out of body experiences, evolution, artificial yes. planetary engineering, flying cars, the future of nuclear energy, future sports, asteroid mining, psychoactive drugs, life extension, stem cells, and bio weapons.
My expectation was a little more techy considering the SciFi reference in the title. But I don't mind surprises when they turn out, at least for me, to be this good even though some of what he talks about is downright scary.
Some of the covered areas: Bionic men,Immortality, out of body experiences, evolution, artificial yes. planetary engineering, flying cars, the future of nuclear energy, future sports, asteroid mining, psychoactive drugs, life extension, stem cells, and bio weapons.
March 12, 2016
This is a nice easy layman read on some of the (keyword:) _potentially_ game-changing technologies that are in the lab, or soon to emerge. It's a good read for anyone who likes to imagine what life might be like in 10 or 20 or 30 years, so long as you don't get hung up on the fact that this isn't a peer reviewed science journal - just an imaginative ride.
One thing I actually liked is that it didn't try to be overpretentious and delve into the details. It was almost what I guess you could call a "bathroom read", as each chapter was standalone - and written (probably not coincidentally) to be about the length of a feature magazine or newspaper article. I'm guessing the author just stapled together a bunch of previously written articles for this book, but hey - why not?
One thing I actually liked is that it didn't try to be overpretentious and delve into the details. It was almost what I guess you could call a "bathroom read", as each chapter was standalone - and written (probably not coincidentally) to be about the length of a feature magazine or newspaper article. I'm guessing the author just stapled together a bunch of previously written articles for this book, but hey - why not?
March 11, 2019
Книга о передовых рубежах науки и техники. Т.к. достаточно свежая (оригинал издан в 2015 году, написан в 2014, данные в тексте примерно по 2013), читать интересно.
Думал, что будет скучно. Я ж современный человек, по мере сил мониторю всякое в науке, новости читаю. Ну что мне расскажет этот Котлер? А рассказал.
Журналистски бодро проскакали по новым протезам, по терраформированию, по синтезу клеток, по наркоте и стероидам, по внетелесному опыту (ну… тут такое…), по летающему автомобилю и т.п. Нет, правда, много занимательного. Будущее уже не будущее, но за дверью.
Стоит почитать, особенно если вы вообще не в курсе, чего там в лабораториях творят.
Думал, что будет скучно. Я ж современный человек, по мере сил мониторю всякое в науке, новости читаю. Ну что мне расскажет этот Котлер? А рассказал.
Журналистски бодро проскакали по новым протезам, по терраформированию, по синтезу клеток, по наркоте и стероидам, по внетелесному опыту (ну… тут такое…), по летающему автомобилю и т.п. Нет, правда, много занимательного. Будущее уже не будущее, но за дверью.
Стоит почитать, особенно если вы вообще не в курсе, чего там в лабораториях творят.
March 6, 2017
This came highly recommended but I was pretty disappointed by this collection of arbitrary pieces on "future" tech. There are barely a couple of pieces that stay with you - rest are just a waste of time. Particularly the pieces on the return of psychedelic drugs in palliative healthcare and sperm bank chapters - I could not figure out why are these "hot" topics for the near future.
Avoidable.
Avoidable.
December 30, 2015
A great book that covers many different topics of the science we're seeing now and in the near future. Some topics were more interesting than others, but that's down to personal taste. I wished some of the sections were a bit longer too, but that way there's need to be a whole other book written about one topic! A great springboard into further reading topics.
November 5, 2015
Too biased for me.
I enjoyed the book overall, it was well written and entertaining, however I wish it wasn't so political,. The author does a great job making people who are republicans or Christians look like idiots.
I enjoyed the book overall, it was well written and entertaining, however I wish it wasn't so political,. The author does a great job making people who are republicans or Christians look like idiots.
July 31, 2018
Enjoyed this. The final chapter was an odd way to end, rather less hopeful of Tomorrowland than it should be. If the chapter on prosthetics was the last topic it would have been a positive note. Still, interesting and worth a listen.
October 31, 2015
I was pleasantly surprised by the strong but unstated transhumanist undercurrent. Unfortunately, the quality of the content degrades as you read through the book. I recommend the first 75% of it.
October 24, 2015
I won this book through the giveaways. Tomorrowland is a decent book about technology and sci-fi. It seems a bit outdated but could help people understand concepts.
March 10, 2018
Smiling naive progressive hogwash.
February 27, 2018
When I first started this book, I was excited to read about the advent of new technologies. I'm not sure what I expected, but I certainly did not expect what was coming. The book is written by a journalist who, to his credit, makes no claims of credibility, but that is probably because they would be laughed at.
The writing style flows well enough, and the book reads well too. That is actually what earned him one of two stars that I gave him for this book.
The book examines "cutting edge technologies", and looks at their future, and the impact that they could have on our daily lives. It is written in the form of unconnected essays and articles about each technology, and the 'disruptive effects' of said technologies on society. One part pure speculation and one part garbled data does not make a good article. The events listed in the book are correct, to some extent at least, but they have been tainted by faith healing and miracle cures which 'modern medicine cannot explain', with no evidence aside from anecdotal bits and pieces to back it up. When a writer writes 20 credible well researched articles to establish credibility and trust, and tries to use that credibility to sell a piece of utter fiction, he usually end up damning the every other article he wrote. That is exactly what has consistently occurred throughout this book.
Let's agree on one thing: Predictions about the future of technology are hard work, especially in the field of science. That leaves the writer with some room for speculation, and a stretch of imagination to explore a technology and it's possibilities in the future. Without that stretch of imagination, without that intuitive leap, there is no hope for progress. Lord Byron once said about the future of science: "X-rays will prove to be a hoax. Television is utter nonsense."
Well, I'm sure his spirit is resting peacefully.
That being said, packaging wild speculation as believable reality is not the best way to go about it. Steven Kotler either writes to deceive his readers on purpose or writes because he believes what he writes, and that leaves room for him to be either a charlatan, or a fool.
The problem with writing like this is that people will buy into it, and believe whatever is said, because who really bothers to follow up. There are some points made well, and some things written beautifully but all of it comes to naught towards the end of the book.
Another major flaw is that the technologies talked about have not been explored to a fraction of their potential, but just been touched on the surface. An example of this is one of the later chapters where Kotler argues that the greatest threat to the President of the US is a biological attack because it is impossible to protect him from that. He goes on to talk about how the Secret Service can't protect him because his DNA is on everything he touches, and "other governments already have a database of the president's DNA". At this point, killing Donald Trump with a viral organism would virtually guarantee funding for the biohacker in question from the rest of the extremely grateful world, I would suspect. That however is not the point. When you examine a revolutionary technology within a minute paradigm you are insulting the people who worked on it, and trivialising what could truly be achieved with it, and creating an unnecessary Frankenstein where there need be none.
This is a small example of the way the book has gotten on my nerves.
On a slightly more positive note, if one follows up on the article and keeps a sceptical mind , they will find that a lot of what has been written about in the book is true enough.
What Steven Kotler really needed to do before writing this book was read Michio Kaku's Physics of the Impossible, and then try tackling the same subjects.
I'm going to stop this review here because I do not like commenting negatively on someone else's work, but rest assured, there is plenty more to be said.
Read this book at the risk of hair loss. Because you'll rip it out in frustration.
The writing style flows well enough, and the book reads well too. That is actually what earned him one of two stars that I gave him for this book.
The book examines "cutting edge technologies", and looks at their future, and the impact that they could have on our daily lives. It is written in the form of unconnected essays and articles about each technology, and the 'disruptive effects' of said technologies on society. One part pure speculation and one part garbled data does not make a good article. The events listed in the book are correct, to some extent at least, but they have been tainted by faith healing and miracle cures which 'modern medicine cannot explain', with no evidence aside from anecdotal bits and pieces to back it up. When a writer writes 20 credible well researched articles to establish credibility and trust, and tries to use that credibility to sell a piece of utter fiction, he usually end up damning the every other article he wrote. That is exactly what has consistently occurred throughout this book.
Let's agree on one thing: Predictions about the future of technology are hard work, especially in the field of science. That leaves the writer with some room for speculation, and a stretch of imagination to explore a technology and it's possibilities in the future. Without that stretch of imagination, without that intuitive leap, there is no hope for progress. Lord Byron once said about the future of science: "X-rays will prove to be a hoax. Television is utter nonsense."
Well, I'm sure his spirit is resting peacefully.
That being said, packaging wild speculation as believable reality is not the best way to go about it. Steven Kotler either writes to deceive his readers on purpose or writes because he believes what he writes, and that leaves room for him to be either a charlatan, or a fool.
The problem with writing like this is that people will buy into it, and believe whatever is said, because who really bothers to follow up. There are some points made well, and some things written beautifully but all of it comes to naught towards the end of the book.
Another major flaw is that the technologies talked about have not been explored to a fraction of their potential, but just been touched on the surface. An example of this is one of the later chapters where Kotler argues that the greatest threat to the President of the US is a biological attack because it is impossible to protect him from that. He goes on to talk about how the Secret Service can't protect him because his DNA is on everything he touches, and "other governments already have a database of the president's DNA". At this point, killing Donald Trump with a viral organism would virtually guarantee funding for the biohacker in question from the rest of the extremely grateful world, I would suspect. That however is not the point. When you examine a revolutionary technology within a minute paradigm you are insulting the people who worked on it, and trivialising what could truly be achieved with it, and creating an unnecessary Frankenstein where there need be none.
This is a small example of the way the book has gotten on my nerves.
On a slightly more positive note, if one follows up on the article and keeps a sceptical mind , they will find that a lot of what has been written about in the book is true enough.
What Steven Kotler really needed to do before writing this book was read Michio Kaku's Physics of the Impossible, and then try tackling the same subjects.
I'm going to stop this review here because I do not like commenting negatively on someone else's work, but rest assured, there is plenty more to be said.
Read this book at the risk of hair loss. Because you'll rip it out in frustration.
January 1, 2023
The average person’s life experiences amounts to 50 terabytes of data. Facts like this are dotted throughout the book, as it takes us through examples of progress from technology, medicine, biology (etc).
The stories are interesting, and are written in a fast paced journalistic style. That aids readability, to some extent; but the human interest angles, and asides represent a style that is quite different from more hard nosed scientific accounts, and some readers may find it jarring.
The stories in the book were diverse, but they didn’t seem to always be pressed to their conclusions. For example, when we are told that lives contain around 50 terabytes of data it is in the context of claims about being able to download that data and thus make people live eternally on silicon chips. The author refers to it as a scenario of ‘soul catcher.’
But does downloading a person’s data-experiences really capture a soul and confer immortality? Its like suggesting that cloning a person makes them eternal? Doesn’t it just make a copy of the person, albeit an identical copy. Yet a copy isn’t an original, so in what sense is that a conferring of immortality on the original person? These kinds of philosophical questions (and assumptions) underpin how reports about developing technologies are to be interpreted, and what their implications are. They raise questions which need answers, or at least acknowledging as unanswered questions, so that the author’s conclusions can be seen to be more ambiguous than they might otherwise seem.
Similar issues arose when the author referred to human beings taking control over their own evolution, as a new ‘homo evolutus,’ and thus possibly creating new hominids. He noted that some 90% of Downs Syndrome babies are currently being aborted, so we’re close to being able to control natural selection and improve the expressions of humanity.
Is that an endorsement of abortion of the handicapped, for the good of the human race? The author makes it clear that he is not in favour of Eugenic creation of Master races, but the direction of the argument seems to be towards precisely that sort of goal. He claims that no single master race could develop, because those creating their own (un)natural selections will invariably have many differences of style and preference. And so there will be an unavoidable variety in the engineered humanity (and hominids) of the future. Really? Possibly, but aren’t there are also some common preferences about intelligence and beauty which might tend towards uniformity?
What was noticeably missing from the discussion of hominids, and also from other chapters, was a consideration of ethics. Just because something might be possible, does that make it desirable or even advisable?
There were definitely some interesting ideas in the book, but they tended to raise questions which went further than the book seemed to want to go. Thoughtful readers may find that a little frustrating.
The stories are interesting, and are written in a fast paced journalistic style. That aids readability, to some extent; but the human interest angles, and asides represent a style that is quite different from more hard nosed scientific accounts, and some readers may find it jarring.
The stories in the book were diverse, but they didn’t seem to always be pressed to their conclusions. For example, when we are told that lives contain around 50 terabytes of data it is in the context of claims about being able to download that data and thus make people live eternally on silicon chips. The author refers to it as a scenario of ‘soul catcher.’
But does downloading a person’s data-experiences really capture a soul and confer immortality? Its like suggesting that cloning a person makes them eternal? Doesn’t it just make a copy of the person, albeit an identical copy. Yet a copy isn’t an original, so in what sense is that a conferring of immortality on the original person? These kinds of philosophical questions (and assumptions) underpin how reports about developing technologies are to be interpreted, and what their implications are. They raise questions which need answers, or at least acknowledging as unanswered questions, so that the author’s conclusions can be seen to be more ambiguous than they might otherwise seem.
Similar issues arose when the author referred to human beings taking control over their own evolution, as a new ‘homo evolutus,’ and thus possibly creating new hominids. He noted that some 90% of Downs Syndrome babies are currently being aborted, so we’re close to being able to control natural selection and improve the expressions of humanity.
Is that an endorsement of abortion of the handicapped, for the good of the human race? The author makes it clear that he is not in favour of Eugenic creation of Master races, but the direction of the argument seems to be towards precisely that sort of goal. He claims that no single master race could develop, because those creating their own (un)natural selections will invariably have many differences of style and preference. And so there will be an unavoidable variety in the engineered humanity (and hominids) of the future. Really? Possibly, but aren’t there are also some common preferences about intelligence and beauty which might tend towards uniformity?
What was noticeably missing from the discussion of hominids, and also from other chapters, was a consideration of ethics. Just because something might be possible, does that make it desirable or even advisable?
There were definitely some interesting ideas in the book, but they tended to raise questions which went further than the book seemed to want to go. Thoughtful readers may find that a little frustrating.
May 21, 2017
Picked this up because it looked like the sort of book I ought to be reading as an engineer, instead of chick-lit. I was less than impressed to get it home from the library and realize that it is just a collection of previously-published magazine articles, some as much as 15 years old. He claims to have updated them, but it really didn't seem that way. All the references to "in the next few years" "within the next decade" etc drove me crazy because I didn't know if that referred to the book publication, or the original article publication (listed in the front). I also wasn't a huge fan of his irreverent writing style when talking about amputees and people with serious health problems. (Also, I don't think children stare at amputees because that's the worst thing they can imagine happening. I think children stare at anything they haven't seen before, and amputees aren't that common.)
All that aside, this book did include interesting things to think about. I really liked the story about Hugh Herr, the mountain climber who lost both feet to frostbite, designed his own protheses specialized for climbing, and "became the first disabled athlete to outperform able-bodied ones at an expert level." That's awesome. The one about the blind person seeing with a vision implant in his brain was originally published in 2002, and I would have been really interested to hear an update. Same with the one about terraforming the Everglades - they must have data on whether or not it is working by now. About terraforming - usually in sci-fi, they talk about terraforming dead planets into live ones, not manipulating existing ecosystems with thousands of interdependent species. (Just checked Wikipedia, Dobelle died in 2004. Maybe the implant research died with him?)
Some chapters sounded like conspiracy theories, and I haven't gone digging to verify the author's claims. If they are true, it's sad, though. Apparently IFR (Integral Fast Reactor) nuclear technology has been demonstrated to solve the problems of previous reactors, but it came at a bad time politically and so isn't being used. Apparently steroids only do good things for people, but the government decided that steroid use skewed sports results so they started propagating false information, and made them illegal, but really steroids could alleviate the suffering of aging and that's what most people want to use them for. Also, apparently psychedelic drugs can be therapeutic for people in intractable pain, but the government made the drugs illegal in the 70s and now nobody can do research on them.
The idea of bioterrorism, or target bio-assassination based on the president's specific DNA, is very creepy. Does the Secret Service really try to keep everything the president touches?
Anyway, now you can't say that all I read is chick-lit.
All that aside, this book did include interesting things to think about. I really liked the story about Hugh Herr, the mountain climber who lost both feet to frostbite, designed his own protheses specialized for climbing, and "became the first disabled athlete to outperform able-bodied ones at an expert level." That's awesome. The one about the blind person seeing with a vision implant in his brain was originally published in 2002, and I would have been really interested to hear an update. Same with the one about terraforming the Everglades - they must have data on whether or not it is working by now. About terraforming - usually in sci-fi, they talk about terraforming dead planets into live ones, not manipulating existing ecosystems with thousands of interdependent species. (Just checked Wikipedia, Dobelle died in 2004. Maybe the implant research died with him?)
Some chapters sounded like conspiracy theories, and I haven't gone digging to verify the author's claims. If they are true, it's sad, though. Apparently IFR (Integral Fast Reactor) nuclear technology has been demonstrated to solve the problems of previous reactors, but it came at a bad time politically and so isn't being used. Apparently steroids only do good things for people, but the government decided that steroid use skewed sports results so they started propagating false information, and made them illegal, but really steroids could alleviate the suffering of aging and that's what most people want to use them for. Also, apparently psychedelic drugs can be therapeutic for people in intractable pain, but the government made the drugs illegal in the 70s and now nobody can do research on them.
The idea of bioterrorism, or target bio-assassination based on the president's specific DNA, is very creepy. Does the Secret Service really try to keep everything the president touches?
Anyway, now you can't say that all I read is chick-lit.
August 18, 2018
For those who haven't read a book like this before it is good. But if you have ready a few Kurzweil or Diamandis books a lot of this is more of the same. Much like many of the good authors, Kotler takes a vague topic, "tomorrowland" and covers a wide variety of topics and hopes some of them appeal to everyone. In the end most people will feel like it was a pretty good book - but for various reasons.
There are 4 major parts. Then he spends 6-8 chapters diving into each of these topics....usually topics he could cover in 1-2 chapters.
Part 1
The section on synthetic limbs is sort of interesting but way too much detail on one idea.
The mind uploading stuff was interesting.
Artificial Vision was pretty fascinating.
Part 2
Florida environmental restoration from sugar cane farms back to swamps - interesting.
Flying cars - probably the same you can read in tech websites
Nuclear energy - interesting updates on this, but nothing crazy
Space Diving - great, probably the same you can read in tech websites
Genetically engineered mosquitoes - probably the same you can read in tech websites
Asteroid mining - interesting if you've never heard of it.
Part 3
There is a whole section trying to convince you to take LSD and MDNA...not really good.
Life extension / steroids - too detailed and again not interested in taking drugs. He seems to gloss over all the negative effects of taking drugs.
Part 4
Stem cells are known by anyone that reads a newspaper but he goes into depth on sperm banks if that interests you. Copying the President's DNA was interesting.
Summary
If you read 20 books a years, sure this should be one of them. If you only read 4 books a year, check out a few others first and just read a lot of tech websites.
Tell me what you thought or about other books you liked - rickmc1427@hotmail.com
Similar books:
The Singularity is Near by Ray Kurzweil
Bold by Peter Diamandis
There are 4 major parts. Then he spends 6-8 chapters diving into each of these topics....usually topics he could cover in 1-2 chapters.
Part 1
The section on synthetic limbs is sort of interesting but way too much detail on one idea.
The mind uploading stuff was interesting.
Artificial Vision was pretty fascinating.
Part 2
Florida environmental restoration from sugar cane farms back to swamps - interesting.
Flying cars - probably the same you can read in tech websites
Nuclear energy - interesting updates on this, but nothing crazy
Space Diving - great, probably the same you can read in tech websites
Genetically engineered mosquitoes - probably the same you can read in tech websites
Asteroid mining - interesting if you've never heard of it.
Part 3
There is a whole section trying to convince you to take LSD and MDNA...not really good.
Life extension / steroids - too detailed and again not interested in taking drugs. He seems to gloss over all the negative effects of taking drugs.
Part 4
Stem cells are known by anyone that reads a newspaper but he goes into depth on sperm banks if that interests you. Copying the President's DNA was interesting.
Summary
If you read 20 books a years, sure this should be one of them. If you only read 4 books a year, check out a few others first and just read a lot of tech websites.
Tell me what you thought or about other books you liked - rickmc1427@hotmail.com
Similar books:
The Singularity is Near by Ray Kurzweil
Bold by Peter Diamandis
July 26, 2017
"Tomorrowland: Our Journey from Science Fiction to Science Fact" by Steven Kotler
Judging a book by it's cover, I thought that this book would be more about spaceships and laser guns. Really it wasn’t and that turned out to be fine because I found this book to be a fascinating way to introduce many stories from technology’s future and accomplishments. I found it informative but not like a boring a textbook, and I researched several topics further on my own, which is what took me so long to read the book! I was impressed by the number of topics that were discussed. I might have wished the book was longer since it covers so much, but I think it was done well.
Some topics were underwhelming I think because we are so familiar with them. But understanding the journey to get to where we are made me appreciate them much more. Probably my favorite topics from this book were:
- Future of Human Evolution, Obesity, and Genome Research
- Pesticide Wars and GMO Mosquitos
- MDMA Therapy, Fear of Death, Epilepsy and Oneness with the Universe
- Stem Cells
- Future of DNA Specific Cancer Therapy
- Asteroid Mining/Space Exploration
- Space Diving
- Steroids
- Protecting the President’s DNA & Bio-Hacking
Judging a book by it's cover, I thought that this book would be more about spaceships and laser guns. Really it wasn’t and that turned out to be fine because I found this book to be a fascinating way to introduce many stories from technology’s future and accomplishments. I found it informative but not like a boring a textbook, and I researched several topics further on my own, which is what took me so long to read the book! I was impressed by the number of topics that were discussed. I might have wished the book was longer since it covers so much, but I think it was done well.
Some topics were underwhelming I think because we are so familiar with them. But understanding the journey to get to where we are made me appreciate them much more. Probably my favorite topics from this book were:
- Future of Human Evolution, Obesity, and Genome Research
- Pesticide Wars and GMO Mosquitos
- MDMA Therapy, Fear of Death, Epilepsy and Oneness with the Universe
- Stem Cells
- Future of DNA Specific Cancer Therapy
- Asteroid Mining/Space Exploration
- Space Diving
- Steroids
- Protecting the President’s DNA & Bio-Hacking
February 20, 2023
Kind of a fun book about many of the things that were once science fiction that are now becoming science fact. Most of the chapters are really good and make you think about how rapidly science advances, and how we struggle to deal with some of the dilemmas they present. Some of the advances like gene research, dna coding etc, present us with life changing decisions, both good and bad. Some advances like nuclear and biologic research have incredible impacts on our way of life, but can also be used to extinguish it. There is no doubt that society is changing faster than ever before and like it or not our lives are starting to resemble the future envisioned by many famous science fiction authors. There are a couple of chapters where you could tell the author had a strong bias where he was unable to fairly present both sides, like the chapter on psychedelic drugs where he only dwelled on the possibly positive aspects of helping some to cope with death while not even mentioning the many peoples lives who are totally controlled by these substances. Overall an enjoyable book that takes a mostly positive look on the future while also presenting the importance of handling these advances in positive ways.
July 17, 2017
Tomorrowland is a series of explorations via case study of various things that are typically considered science fiction and how they have moved, are moving, or will move into the realm of science fact. There are some of these case studies that I think are a tad overblown; it may be very cool to think that DIY flying cars are 'on their way to the common person' right now, but I think the science, regulations, and the pricing still have a ways to come before they will be for anyone with a decent amount of disposable income, a lot of time, and a very large degree of confidence in their building skills. However, I felt that most chapters were fair overviews of scientific game-chamgers that are at the cutting edge of science now (such as the chapters on bioengineering with DNA and robotics) or are likely to be at the cutting edge in the bear future because economic concerns are pushing the field forward (such as the chapter on asteroid mining to get materials that are rare on Earth but common in space). Overall, though, I felt that Tomorrowland presented decemt overviews for readers unfamiliar with the science or the implications.
January 29, 2018
This is not a cohesive book. It's an odd collection of repurposed journal articles, and they have a hard time fitting together.
It includes great info on some good real science stuff, like human-machine interface , asteroid mining. But he misses on some major issues: skirts around energy generation and food production, barely mentions artificial intelligence, and talks about genetic science through a few chapters but doesn't give it the pointed coordinated treatment it deserves. Long chapters about fringe issues like psychedelic drugs, flying car, and the restoration of the Everglades (he confuses this one with terraforming of exoplanets). Ends on the anticlimactic tech of sperm banks (or is it "climactic" actually?) and then comes to a hard stop with no wrap-up or conclusion.
Style wise, this author definitely subscribes to the idea that you always need to use a human story to make scientific facts interesting. Might be true in some cases, but I really got tired of long drawn out details about minor players in the scientific narrative. Found myself skipping page after page of those parts.
It includes great info on some good real science stuff, like human-machine interface , asteroid mining. But he misses on some major issues: skirts around energy generation and food production, barely mentions artificial intelligence, and talks about genetic science through a few chapters but doesn't give it the pointed coordinated treatment it deserves. Long chapters about fringe issues like psychedelic drugs, flying car, and the restoration of the Everglades (he confuses this one with terraforming of exoplanets). Ends on the anticlimactic tech of sperm banks (or is it "climactic" actually?) and then comes to a hard stop with no wrap-up or conclusion.
Style wise, this author definitely subscribes to the idea that you always need to use a human story to make scientific facts interesting. Might be true in some cases, but I really got tired of long drawn out details about minor players in the scientific narrative. Found myself skipping page after page of those parts.
August 6, 2024
This book presents a nice collection of technological advancements. Unfortunately though, he keeps focussing on the people who were part of these inventions rather than the inventions themselves. This leads to a very meandering way of storytelling which is at times a bit confusing and makes you loose track of what these stories are supposed to be about, the scientific advancements. The few chapters where he does actually focus on the scientific details were much better.
Furthermore, there is next to no coherence between the stories. They were originally written as a series of individual articles. But if you put these together into one book, you should really do a bit more than slap an introduction infront of it all and call it a day. Also, some of the articles seem to have been written quite some time before the publication of the book. There I would have liked to see them placed into the context of more recent developments. And a wrap up at the end instead of just abruptly ending on a story on sperm donation would have been nice.
All in all, it’s an interesting idea, unfortunately badly executed.
Furthermore, there is next to no coherence between the stories. They were originally written as a series of individual articles. But if you put these together into one book, you should really do a bit more than slap an introduction infront of it all and call it a day. Also, some of the articles seem to have been written quite some time before the publication of the book. There I would have liked to see them placed into the context of more recent developments. And a wrap up at the end instead of just abruptly ending on a story on sperm donation would have been nice.
All in all, it’s an interesting idea, unfortunately badly executed.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 119 reviews