I’ve been grappling with two very different ways of thinking about the future lately.
The first is the stark outlook presented by those who think AI could pose a catastrophic risk to humanity, as embodied by the protesters I interviewed last week. The topic is becoming more visible on the shelves of bookshops, most notably with the publication this week of Eliezer Yudkowksy and Nate Soares’ new book, If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies.
On Monday, I went to a talk on Tom Ough’s The Anti-Catastrophe League, about the people who work in the field of existential risk more broadly. During the Q&A, I was slightly alarmed to learn that – alongside well-known threats like pandemics and volcanoes and rampaging AGI – there might be some unnamed calamities that researchers choose not to even talk about in public. Mystery dangers that would cause too much panic if discussed in the open.
At the same time, I’ve also been thinking about a different approach to the future – that of imagining utopias. Another recent book, Designing Hope by Sarah Housley, explores how futures like these get made and become recognisable cultural touchstones. Ideas like solarpunk or the metaverse or degrowth may not be everyone’s idea of the perfect future (Housley prefers Kevin Kelly’s term “protopia”), but they have all managed to gain recognition as shared visions, ones that are recognisable to lots of people whether they like them or not.
How does that happen? Housley argues that futures become ‘real’ when they are taken seriously and used as a basis for decisions taken by companies, governments and NGOs. To get to that point, the ideas need to have some coherence and they need to make it past the point where they break out of their niche communities and become more widely known to the public. She points to the example of Google Glass, the discontinued smart glasses that failed to catch on despite two attempts in the 2010s.
“We need to remember that we have to co-design the future,” Housley told me on a call a couple of weeks ago. “It has to be co-created, and there's a lot of different ways to do that. But a top-down intervention by a company is never really the best approach.”
A former head of consumer tech for trend forecasting giant WGSN, Housley has put her mind to what might happen next in a whole range of industries. It’s surprising to think about which everyday products need to be futureproof; a humble lift, for example, might need to be able to ferry passengers between floors for 20-25 years. A lot could change in that time.
More recently, she has become interested in how the processes used by her profession could be applied more widely. “These tools that we use to think about commercial futures are just as relevant for communal futures, or noncommercial futures,” she said.
It’s a pressing problem, she explained, because something in our culture has lost the spark of 1950s futurism and the golden age of sci-fi. People feel less optimistic about looking ahead. But amid the current pace of technological and social change, there could be an opportunity to reinject some optimism and ownership of the future, she argues. “The years ahead hold the potential to be a galvanising time: with the Overton window opened and new ideas seeming possible, it’s time to start creating the futures we want to bring into being,” she writes.
Designing Hope doesn’t take a stance on which vision of the future is preferable, instead using each one as a case study for ideas gather pace and are put into practice in the real world. As well as drawing on activism and policy, it pulls in examples from art projects, hackers, DIY projects and unusual startups. A vision for how the future looks might just as well come from a project like Argentinian artist Tomás Saraceno’s solar and wind-powered hot air balloon as from a massive company or government.
I was interested in how she thought design, and aesthetics more generally, play a role in selling people on an idea about what the future will — or should — be like.
“At this very basic level of presenting a future that people might want, we have to think about aesthetics,” she said. “Because we have to make it pleasant and enjoyable and aspirational.”
This is certainly something that has been embraced by the YIMBY movement, with good design and pleasant environments recognised as crucial for getting more people on board with new housing. Other groups pushing for change in our built environment have taken up the aesthetic challenge as well. Housley pointed to the EU’s New European Bauhaus as another example. The project pushes for sustainable design to also be made beautiful.
Another challenge in gaining support for potential futures is the hype cycle. Going back to the Google Glass example, it’s an interesting one to think about in the week that Meta has announced its latest smart glasses. Will it catch on this time, failed demo notwithstanding?
This boom and bust of new technologies can leave some of us worried about feeling, well, silly. Adopt too fast and you risk being the person who was all in on 3D cinema.
Housley writes about the Metaverse as an example of this, noting that the hype around the idea in 2021 and 2022 was matched by just as elevated backlash. Many people struggled to imagine what the everyday use case would be for connected virtual reality.
“But I always think the most interesting time to look at a technology is after that hype cycle has moved on,” she told me. “Because you can see amongst the rubble what is left and what is growing.”
It’s where the case hasn’t yet been made in a compelling way for a possible vision that Housley sees some opportunity.
“I get a bit frustrated that people think: well, we did that for a couple of years and it didn't work, now it’ll never happen. Because that’s not what happens with futures. They come back.”
Teatime scroll Each week I share links to writings, events, tweets and other conversation-starters. If you have something you think should be in here, feel free to reply to this email or DM me.
📲 A new Labour Together report argues for a mission-led approach to getting things done in government. It was from this report that I learned of the existence of the gov.uk app, which launched over the summer but totally passed me by. Has anyone tried it?
🏭 Tekever is opening a new drone factory in Swindon.
✍️ I already noted this one in my writing newsletter but it feels pertinent to share here too: The Future of Life Institute has launched a contest awarding cash prizes to digital creative pieces that respond to Anthony Aguirre’s essay ‘Keep the Future Human’, which argues for closing the gates on powerful AI advancement. If that’s something you’re interested in, read full details of the project here.
🖲️ Everybody’s talking about Nscale after the British startup was named in a flurry of deals to scale AI infrastructure this week. If you feel out of the loop, here’s a good writeup on the company from CNBC.
🍺 The next Abundance drinks will take place on Tuesday in Vauxhall.
🎁 I’m co-hosting the Land Talks Christmas quiz! Sign up now and join us for the most wonk-y evening of your life on 25 November.
📰 Over on his Substack, Nick Hilton reports back from the Press Gazette’s Future of Media Technology summit and makes the case against the idea that newsrooms should wholeheartedly embrace AI. This all gave me horrid flashbacks to the ‘pivot to video’ era of journalism.
🏖️ OOO: I’ll be away for the next couple of weeks, so there likely won’t be a regular newsletter again until mid-October. However, there may be a couple of guest posts and I’m still open to publishing a few more. There’s no fee involved. Whether you’re up for reporting from a party conference (Labour is covered) or have something else you think might fit here, let me know via DM or on alys.writer@gmail.com