So, I haven't really noticed anyone bring this up before, and it just suddenly kind of hit me in one of those 'moments of enlightenment'.

So, what hit me? That we have commlinks! It has been so gradual that we didn't even notice it happen! Where are these commlinks? Our advanced netbooks? No! Cellphones!

Think about it, cellphones have come so far, and can do so much now.
Cellphones have had cameras for a while, and video conferencing is becoming more and more common.
Cellphones have had internet access for a while, and now they've gotten to the point that surfing the internet has become quite natural, with the pages turning based on how you hold the phone, zooming and such easily.
Certain banks/phones allow you to deposit checks by taking a photo of the check.
Some cellphones allow you to transfer money directly from account to account through the phone.
Cellphones have had games for a while, and recently the games have been getting fairly advanced, with flash games being a notable market.
Cellphones are quickly gaining apps to allow them to do a huge number of things.

Surprising as it sounds, it seems like cellphones can already do everything that a commlink can do, in a device the same size, or perhaps smaller, with the notable exception of DNI, though I blame that on DNI technology, not on the not so humble cellphone.

Yep.




But seriously, they do mimic commlinks, albeit with much more limited processing power and memory space. Not only do we lack DNI, but we lack a viable AR interface as well (yes, I do realize that we're working on that too).

I think the biggest reason our current phones aren't quite up their is availability. While our phones *can* do those things, only higher end ones do it well. Also, those services generally cost extra in the modern world, whereas they are fairly standard features in 2070.

Very true, and they don't all have every one of those functions either. But it just kind of hit me just how close we are to commlinks already. Or really, that we already have them. Interface is the main difference between a cellphone and a commlink. Besides processing power of course, but that is hard to measure, since it isn't measured in commlinks besides response rating.

I suppose it's one of those things that just really hit me with technology, and its no wonder that you see such huge tech differences between the editions. A couple decades ago, cell phones barely existed, now they can do nearly anything. Heck, three decades ago, we barely had computers and now.. gezz, it's hard to describe. And if you watch science and discovery channel much, you get to see all kinds of cutting edge technology, alot of which is nearly on par with SR stuff, some of it is actually beyond SR stuff.

I can't wait to see what happens in another couple of decades or so.

Today's cellphones can even be used for hacking, especially iPhones and Android devices.

I recall hearing about an iPhone that was set to sniff WiFi traffic and "mistakenly" shipped to a rival company. It sat in their mailroom for about a week (or maybe the external battery pack only lasted for a week), giving the sender a secret channel into the rival company's network.

From SR4A:

• online all-the time - check
• control all of their electronics - not yet but getting there
• access their ID and accounts - check
• enhance their experiences with augmented and virtual reality - (there is an iPhone app that's trying to do the ARO thing, but it's slow and wonky)
• music player - check
• micro-trid/holo projector/“touch-screen” display - check except for holo projector, and we're not at "trid" yet I guess
• camcorder - check
• microphone - check
• image/text scanner - check (with the right software)
• RFID tag reader - not sure?
• GPS - check
• roll-up Velcro-fastening keyboard - sorta check, the floppy "roll-up" keyboard is around but kinda sucks
• chip player - check (SD cards?)
• credstick reader - sorta check (I've seen prototypes for credit card readers to use with an iPhone)
• retractable earbuds - not really check, but no big deal
• voice-access controls - sorta check (Google)
• shock and water-resistant case - check

I get anything wrong or any current tech I'm missing?

All this and more is why we had Crash 2.0 and the new Wireless Matrix with Commlinks. I remember back in '00 when my character was the only one with a Commlink. I thought everyone else on the team was crazy. It even led to my favorite SR war story.

If Google or Apple opens up their platform so that one can make use of external compass and video data, AR glasses are available here:
http://www.vuzix.com/consumer/products_wrap920ar.html

and there is also this:
https://www.zealoptics.com/transcend/

that i can see evolving further.

To make it a Matrix-capable commlink, it needs to be able to have an Active mode, to retrans local wifi networks. So if I'm outside my home wifi network's signal range, your 'commlink' can act as a signal bridge and allow me to connect with it. Of course, that means that we'd just end up trying to create the Matrix 2.0 with wireless access everythere, making ISPs useless. Which I doubt they'll appreciate.

There are systems in the works that do something like that right now.
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Wi-Fi_Direct

there is also this, from new orleans:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5341052

and i know i have read about attempts at similar networks elsewhere.

I heard about similar things in (San Francisco? Seattle?) but they were all shut down for some reason or the other. Money talks. So I'm thinking the Matrix 2.0 is very feasible, except for now the ISPs aren't happy about letting it happen...

A university in New Orleans was offering a graduate-level class in "mesh networking" or something like that. I applied, but then Katrina hit. Never did hear back about the class...

Only in America can City offering free wlan for its citizens be illegal

Have spend lot's of time in the last years time planning,building and maintaining a similar free wlan in Lahti Finland.

Nice. I am guessing that interference becomes a real issue after some time.

going to bump the thread with this:
http://www.redferret.net/?p=24093

now i wonder if it is the angle that makes them look acceptable, as older version have made "bug eye" sunglasses look sane...

still, i do want to see a version with video cameras flush with the lenses, and a compass in the frame so that one can make use of proper AR.

Dude old palms with cellphones have been around for a while.

It isn't that the tech is here it is that it has become widespread.

Really SR is basically a mirror of today's tech with a bit more bangbang, and some magic mixed in, and not really future tech. If you want true futurist tech you can go to Eclipse Phase (Seriously, go look! It's a good game and was originally going to be part of the whole Earthdawn/Shadowrun timeline, basically set after the Horrors come back.).

Cool. Now I just need to figure out how they connect to anything.

@Gerzel - That's the truth about virtually any game that has futuristic technology. Most of it is just current technology with a bit more 'umph'. And most of it is actually way less advanced than it should be. Some have good reasons for this mind you, but it doesn't change the fact for the most point.

A few phones are NFC compatible. NFC is a subset of RFID with a range of 10cm maximum.
It's mostly used for public transportation access in Europe (but in separate cards) and for a lot more (paying, ticketing, marketing...) in Asia (where it might be on the phone).

Floppy rollup keyboards are so last year. Get yourself a laser projection keyboard, they're totally wiz.

Philadelphia's been trying to set up a city wide network for some years now. It's advertised as free, but it isn't, not really.

Verizon and Comcast are up in arms over it because "free" means that the provider loses money on the deal (and we can't have THAT). Not to mention that it'd be monopolistic (one provider, which means there's no competition, and we can't have that EITHER). Despite the fact that the free wifi cities have been putting up covers places where no one can afford an internet connection.

There's currently apps that turn your phone into a barcode scanner, IIRC. RFID capability is only a matter of time.

I could be wrong, but I remember the apps scanning barcodes by using the camera on the phone. RFID would need newer, different tech, I think? Although this NFC thing would fit the bill...

Supposedly the next android version will support NFC.

And as Doctorow says, writing scifi is about predicting the present...

Usually it is about taking some current obscure event or tech and go make it a central feature (3d printing anyone?).

Usually in the same way as a DVR or some other box connects to a TV. Sadly that means that two way communication is rather limited right now.
A combined displayport and usb connection would have been nice.

Yes, you need a RFID/NFC antenna if you want to use NFC/RFID while you just need a camera to read barcodes.
Some companies are selling NFC antenna that can be connected to the phone through bluetooth or sd slot, though.

And iirc, there is now a NFC standard so that the phone can provide the antenna while the SIM card provides storage for the data.

In japan this is less of a issue, as the carriers are economic hydras. Iirc, docomo runs its own bank and issue its own credit cards.

And this makes me ponder what kind of wageslave "perks" a SR comlink comes with, that is useless for a runner (and so do not show up in the SR books).

Kinda like how i see the update system for programs being more then just a security patcher, providing a means for the corps to sell all kinds of "trinkets" that a runner would scoff at.

Btw, i guess hacker and face are the character types most likely to maintain multiple disposable IDs.

Yes, it took several years for everyone (banks, carriers, cellphone manufacturers, credit card companies, SIM card manufacturers, NFC chipset/tags manufacturer, potential NFC services providers, patent trolls and I'm probably missing one or two) to agree on this because everyone wanted to have control over the system.

And now deployment will probably take a long time too since nobody wants to pay but everyone wants to reap the benefits: the manufacturers won't build NFC phones if there's nothing to use them with, services providers won't develop NFC-based services if there aren't any NFC phones to use them. Carriers/banks/credit card companies won't actively support NFC phones if they can't somehow make money and the end-user won't use NFC services if he has to pay more than what he pays without NFC.

Just to counter that point, go find the short story called "The Roads Must Roll." It is an awful, awful, poorly thought out attempt to figure out how transportation works after fossil fuels.

Some famous author* said something like, scifi used to be about predicting the far far future, but as time wore on, scifi began predicting less-far into the future, until scifi nowadays is barely 5-10 years ahead. Something about optimism in the future or something. Can't find the quote anywhere with Google for the life of me...

*I thought I remembered the quote being Gibson's, and when I was lucky enough to meet him at a book signing and asked him about the quote he a) didn't really recognize it, and b) didn't seem happy to have the quote misattributed to him...doh

I think its because we're approaching the technological singularity. It's becoming harder and harder to predict the advances in science decades out (beyond the usual teleporters, flying cars, and widespread space travel) because the other side of the singularity is as inconceivable to us as computers are to a man from the 1800s, or the steam engine to a man from the 1100s.

Every single technological advancement that has had world-reaching effects cannot be conceived by someone who does not know what the technology is. And right now science is advancing at a pace where within the next 10 years or so we'll be revolutionizing computing power in a way that we, right now, cannot even begin to think of the ramifications.

To quote Vernor Vinge:
"We will soon create intelligences greater than our own. When this happens, human history will have reached a kind of singularity, an intellectual transition as impenetrable as the knotted space-time and the center of a black hole, and the world will pass far beyond our understanding. This singularity, I believe, already haunts a number of science-fiction writers. It makes realistic extrapolation to an interstellar future impossible. To write a story set more than a century hence, one needs a nuclear war in between ... so that the world remains intelligible."

I saw an interesting video that was anti-singularity the other day...

ah, here it is: Anti-Singularity

Not sure if it's right or not or whatever, but hopefully an interesting counter-piece.

What that guy is doing is bashing Ray Kurzweil's notion of the singularity, which is good.

Because Ray Kurzweil is...wrong in so many ways. He (Ray) has this idea that we can solve all of the world's problems by 2050 through technology and never once takes into account human nature.

So yes, Ray Kurzweil's definition of the singularity is that we create god with artificial intelligence, which isn't what I'm talking about. I was pretty sure I conveyed that by calling the Steam Engine a technological singularity of the 1600s/1700s/1800s* or the integrated circuit was in the 1960s.

Prior to the steam engine mass transit was impossible and inconceivable. Prior to the integrated circuit everything we have today was impossible and inconceivable (no one in 1950 was capable of predicting the modern cell phone--hand-held communication device? Sure, we had radios, making that smaller was easily fanciful, but not cell phones and their widespread use). "No one will ever need more than 640 kilobytes of RAM."

*Depending on how you decide when the "steam engine" was invented and finally perfected to being useful.

Well, you don't really need more than 640 kilobytes of RAM, it's just very nice and desirable.

As for cellphones, I'm fairly sure various sci-fi things had those back in the 50s. Sure, they were 'communicators' or something similar, but they were basically cellphones. And as I recall, didn't Startrek come out with their communicators before cellphones? Sure they were hands free and voice activated, but they were still cellphones.

Star Trek started in 1966. And my point was cell phones, not "a hand held communcations device."

Cell phones are far more advanced (even in their 2 pound brik-phone form) than Star Trek communicators. Communicators are the equivalent of walkie-talkies.

We still had phone operators who connected non-mobile phones in 1975. So a mobile device that could call anyone anywhere would have been damn fanciful in 1950. Possible to imagine such a device? Yes. Possible to imagine that every 14 year old in the united states would own one? No.

How so? What could original cellphones do that a Star Trek communicator couldn't?

I might not be up on my star trek, I never watched it, but I was under the assumption that it didn't allow the user to call any single other user in perfect privacy.

Judging by the fact that the call went: 'tap communictor to activate it, call a specific name, other person got a ring, then they tapped the communicator to talk' it seems very much like a personal 1 to 1 phone call. Now, it was also possible to use it for conference calls or to send out ship-wide messages and stuff, but I've never seen anything (not that I've watched many episodes) that showed the 1 on 1 calls to be any less private than a cellphone call.

Then I was wrong.

Oh well.

It's still 15 years (original star trek) after the year I indicated and I might still be wrong. It was an example. I could have said that cell phones were inconceivable to an ancient Egyptian, to which the answer would be "no shit" and just as useless.

Here's the best way to prove my point:

Name one technology yet to be invented which will have widespread use in the teen through senior population of a society of at least 200 million people 15 years from now.

No offense but...duh?

This seemed to me like something they were cognizant of when 4E/4A was written.

A commlink is essentially just a souped up cell phone.

Also, I was wrong. Cell phones existed (military use) in the 1950s. The first publically available mobile car system was available in the 1960s (hence star trek communicators).

So drop my "1950" date back about 20 years.

Ok, that was weird. Moving on...

Since when are cellphones perfectly private? Your still punching RF signal through the air, open to god and the world if they're unencrypted/unprotected. No different than a radio, actually. Suspectible to interception, triangulation, real time monitoring, and anything else you can do to a radio. More so, actually, because courtesy of your phone needing to be a designated number (so that the infrastructure knows which pairs to open the radio channel between) you are instantly identifiable.

With a pair of WWII radios you could create an equally "private" channel. Cellphones have merely provided the infrastructure to make this easy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udlxr8t1nZM

Unfortunately in german, but there are english subs.

Bye
Thanee

Dang, everything I want to say is at least in its infancy already, including cybereyes

Portable solar panels, cybernetics, commlinks, all have already been invented. I could point out that 'cellphone' would have been an answer from Star Trek, though they may not have thought it was 15 years away.

Lets see.... laser weaponry is likely to be too inefficient compared to guns for personal use, but it is a possibility.

Okay:
Electronic paper. Yet to be invented to my knowledge, and would be excellent for taking notes for students. Heck, schools wouldn't have to worry about printer costs any more, as teachers could pass out handouts, quizes, and even test through the paper.

I don't know that seniors would be using that, but asking for that wide a range is even more difficult. I doubt that many seniors had cellphones right when they came out either.

It would really suck to turn on the stove function by mistake while it is in your pocket.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_paper

Haven't seen a Kindle yet?

Yes, you can't write on ePaper yet, but that's just a combination of drawing tablets and the ePaper screen and probably not too far off (I would be surprised to hear that no one's working on this already).

I've seen a couple of kids with laptops that have tablet screens. It's pretty much what you're talking about. They scribble on the PDFs we get for reading.

You said it had to not exist yet. Electronic paper as I defined it doesn't exist yet. There are technologies that have similar capacities. Kind of like radios have similar capacities to cellphones. No technology is created in a void. There has never been a technology that simply jumped out of nowhere. The fact is that it is impossible to come up with a technology that doesn't exist yet (at all) but will be widespread in 15 years, because no technology will be invented and become widespread in the next 15 years that doesn't at least have components of it around today.

Yes, a tablet laptop has been around for "about a decade" (my friend and current GM has one that's about 8 years old). Replacing the LCD screen with ePaper is "trivial" (I mean that in the sense that you'd be replacing the display part and ensuring that the remaining functionality was still working).

Well, I'll deny everything you put forth as being a singularity then. Cellphones are just a trivial adaptation of radios. Computers are just a trivial adaptation of earlier computers, which are just a trivial adaptation of whatever was before them (Adding machines, like those old fashioned tills?) which was just a trivial adaptation of an abacus. Steam engines are just trivial adaptations of waterwheels and other similar technologies.

Internal combustion engines were just trivial adaptations of steam engines, etc.

A singularity on the far side of it (eg. us to the steam engine) never appears as a singularity, we can see the cause-effect relationship involved, but from the other side, it's very difficult to conceive of those technologies and their impact on society.

Even as computers were being made and popularized, few people thought that they'd achieve the widespread use that they have today (my mother worked with someone who said that there'd never be a market for more than 7 computers in the whole world).

My point that it is impossible for us to conceive of the next singularity is entirely true:
We cannot guess what gadget will next arise and dominate the market with the ferocity that it does. We can only put forth the ideas we have and see what happens.

For instance, take quantum computers. Assuming we can utilize quantum processing in a manner that competes with current digital technology, how will society change as a result?

I bet you can't answer that.

(One thing we're only just learning out the impact of the internet is that it's causing us to evolve towards a more fragmented and easily interrupted thinking patterns, unlike what books did centuries ago, forcing our brains--which were easily interrupted and have been for millenia because humans evolved from a prey animal--to focus on one thing at a time and to do so for long periods of time)

Hence the widespread occurrence of ADHD in modern times

But, if you're asking for technologies that will change the world, there I have responses.

New engines are being developed for vehicles that will be roughly 3-4 times as efficient as current ICE technology.
New wind turbines are being developed for high altitude wind harvesting that will be able to operate 24/7 and are more efficient in wind -> energy conversion than current mills. (Don't know the exact improvement, but it is significant).
Solar panels with around 50% efficiency currently exist, and around 20% can be made very cheaply.
Nanotube (Not the right name, forgot what it was called.. microflow?) technology is being developed which allows for genetic sequencing on something the size of a credit card.
I won't even go into all the things that are being worked on for production of various oil replacements.
Catoms are being developed. Catoms are programmable matter.

So, what does all this mean for the future of the world? I means that the US and other countries won't be nearly as concerned with the middle east because all those methods of gathering energy and lower energy requirements for vehicles will decrease and eventually eliminate the need for oil for energy (And maybe for things like plastic, but I don't know about that as well).

The pocket genetic lab might see either a decrease in crime rate, or an increase in capture as testing genetic evidence becomes cheap, quick, and easy.

Quantum computers? That's a bit harder to see, as it mainly means an increase in processing power. I suppose increases in processing power would lead to smarter computers, and likely to eventual AI, especially as quantum mechanics could allow an AI to simulate 'random thought'. I'm sure that it will bring about interesting revolutions in computer defense, as the first quantum computers could likely break through modern encryption and similar things with comparatively little difficulty.