Review: “Cloud Atlas”

Plot: Cloud Atlas is comprised of six short films set in six different times and places. Each short film has a unique plot and characters, but they are played by the same actors, leading to many interesting and at times funny role reversals from the viewer’s perspective. The movie jumps between the six stories in a way that shows their thematic similarities. It’s a very ambitious attempt at storytelling through the film medium, but also an unsuccessful one. As a whole, Cloud Atlas is too confusing and practically collapses under its own weight. 

Rather than even attempting to summarize its Byzantine plot in more detail, here’s a link to a well-written plot synopsis you can read if you like before proceeding farther: 

“This film follows the stories of six people’s “souls” across time, and the stories are interweaved as they advance, showing how they all interact. It is about how the people’s lives are connected with and influence each other…”
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1371111/plotsummary?ref_=ttpl_sa_2#synopsis

On the one hand, I’m glad that in today’s sad era of endless sequels, remakes and reboots, Hollywood is still willing to take occasional risks on highly creative, big-budget sci fi films like Cloud Atlas. On the other, none of that changes the fact that movie is a hot mess.

For the purposes of this sci fi analysis, I’m only interested in the chapters of the movie set in the future. The first takes place in Seoul (renamed “Neo Seoul”) in 2144, and the second takes place on a primitive tropical island “hundreds” of years after that, and following some kind of global cataclysm. Though the date when the later sequence happens is never stated in the film, the book on which it is based says it is 2321, and I’ll use that for this review.

Analysis:

Slavery will come back. In 2144, South Korea, and possibly some part of the countries surrounding it, is run by an evil government/company called “Unanimity.” Among its criminal practices is allowing the use of slave labor. The slaves, called “fabricants,” are parentless humans who are conceived in labs, gestated in artificial wombs, and euthanized after 12 years of labor. They seem to have no legal rights, can be killed for minor reasons, and are treated as inferiors by natural-born humans. Though they look externally identical to any other human, it’s hinted that the fabricants have been genetically altered to be obedient and hard workers, and perhaps to have physiological differences. Juvenile fabricants are never shown, which leads me to think they are gestated as mature adults. The 2144 plot centers around one fabricant who escapes from her master and joins a rebel group fighting to end slavery. 

The protagonist of the 2144 film segment is this female fabricant.

Slavery will not exist in 2144 because 1) the arc of history is clearly towards stronger human rights and 2) machines will be much better and cheaper workers than humans by then. In a profit-obsessed society like the one run by Unanimity, no business that employed humans, even those working for free as slaves, could survive against competitors that used robots. After all, it still costs money to feed, clothe, and house human slaves, and to give them medical care when necessary. And while the film implies that the human slaves partly exist to gratify the sexual needs of human clients, robots–specifically, androids–should be superior in that line of work, as well. 

For these same reasons, if intelligent machines have taken over the planet by 2144, it won’t make sense for them to enslave humans, or at least not for long. Intelligent machines would find it cheaper, safer, and better to build task-specific, “dumb” machines to do jobs for them than to employ humans. There could be a nightmare scenario where AIs win a mutually devastating war with humanity, and due to scarce resources and destroyed infrastructure, the use of human labor is the best option, but this arrangement would only last until the AIs could build worker robots.  

Human clones will exist. Though the fabricants are played by different actresses, the protagonist that escapes from her master later sees fabricants that look identical to her. This means the fabricants as a whole have limited genetic diversity and probably consist of several strains of clones. 

“Zhong Zhong” and “Hua Hua” are identical clones of an adult monkey.

Human clones will be created long before 2144. In 2018, Chinese scientists made two clones of one monkey. Given the close similarities between human and monkey genetics and chromosome structure, the same technique or a variant of it could be used to clone humans. The only thing that has stopped it from happening so far is bioethics concerns stemming from the technique’s high failure rate–77 out of 79 cloned monkey embryos that were implanted in surrogate mothers during the experiment were miscarried or died shortly after birth. More time and more experiments will surely refine the process. 

When will the success rate be “good enough” for us to make the first human clones? Sir John Gurdon won a Nobel Prize for his 1962 experiments cloning frogs. In 2012, he predicted that human cloning would probably begin in 50 years–which is 2062. Given the state of the science today, that looks reasonable. 

In 2144, cloning will be affordable and legal in at least one country that allows medical tourism, but only a tiny percentage of people will want to use it, and an insignificant share of the human race will consist of clones. Bereaved parents wanting to replace their dead children will probably be the industry’s main customers. It sounds creepy, but what if the clones actually make most of them happy?

Display screens will cover many types of surfaces. The bar/restaurant staffed by the fabricants is a drab room whose walls, ceilings, floors, and furniture are covered by thin display screens. At the flick of a switch, the screens can come alive and show colors, images, and moving pictures just like a traditional TV or computer monitor. An apartment is also shown later on that has a wraparound room display. 

I conservatively predict that wallpaper-like display screens with the same capabilities and performance as those depicted in the movie will be a mature, affordable technology by 2044, which is 100 years before the events shown in the film segment. In other words, it will be very old technology. The displays built into the floors would have to be thickest and most robust for obvious reasons, and will probably be the last ones to be introduced. This technology will allow people to have wall-sized TV screens in their houses, to place “lights” at any points and configuration in a given room, and to create immersive environments like cruder versions of the Star Trek “holodeck.”  

Through a “transparent” wall, the partly flooded city of Seoul is visible.

Walls will be able to turn transparent. In the aforementioned apartment, one of the walls can turn into a “fake window” at the push of a button. The display screen that covers it can display live footage from outside the building, presumably provided to it by exterior cameras. This technology should also be affordable and highly convincing in effect by 2044, if not earlier. Note that the Wachowskis also included this technology in their film Jupiter Ascending, but it was used to make floors transparent instead of walls. 

There will be 3D printed meals. The 2144 segment begins in a bar/restaurant staffed by fabricants. A sequence shows a typical work day for them, and we see how a 3D “food printer” creates realistic-looking dishes in seconds. The printer consists of downward-pointing nozzles that spray colored substances onto bowls and dishes, where it congeals into solid matter. Its principle of operation is like a color printer’s, but it can stack layers of edible “ink” to rapidly build up things. 

A 3D food printer somehow squirts out these elaborate-looking meals in under ten seconds.

3D food printers already exist, and they can surely be improved, but they will never be able to additively manufacture serving-sizes of food in seconds, unless you’re making a homogenized, simple dish like soft-serve ice cream or steak tartare. To manufacture a complex piece of food like those shown in the film sequence, much more time would be needed for the squirted biomatter to settle and set properly to achieve the desired texture and appearance, and for heat, lasers or chemicals to cook it properly. For these reasons, I don’t think the depiction of the futuristic 3D food printer will prove accurate.

However, the next best things will be widely available by then: lab-grown foods and fast robot chefs. By 2144, it should be cheaper to synthesize almost any type of food than to grow or raise it the natural way, and I predict humans will get most of their calories from industrial-scale labs. This includes meat, which we’ll grow using stem cells. Common processed foodstuffs like flour, corn starch, and sugar could also be directly synthesized from inorganic chemicals and electricity, saving us from having to grow and harvest the plants that naturally make them.

A 3D food printer today.

The benefits of the “manufactured food” paradigm will be enormous. First, it would be much more humane since we would no longer need to kill billions of animals per year for food. Second, it would be better for the environment since we could make most of our food indoors, in enclosed facilities. The environmental damage caused by the application of pesticides and fertilizers would drop because we’d have fewer open-air farms. And since the “food factories” would be more efficient, we could produce the same number of calories on a smaller land footprint, which would allow us to let old farms revert back to nature. Third, it would be better for the economy. Manufactured food would be cheaper since it would cut out costly intermediate steps like planting seeds, harvesting plants, separating their edible parts from the rest, and butchering animals to isolate their different cuts of meat. No time, money or energy would be spent making excess matter like corn husks, banana peels, chicken feathers, animal brains, or bones–the synthesis process would be waste-free, and would turn inorganic matter and small clumps of stem cells directly into 100% edible pieces of food. Food factory output would also be largely unaffected by uncontrollable natural events like droughts, hailstorms, an locust swarms, making food supply levels much more predictable and prices more stable. Fourth, food factories would be able to produce cleaner, higher-quality foods at lower cost. The energy and material costs of making a premium ribeye steak are probably no higher than the costs of making a tough, rubbery round steak. With that in mind, the meat factories could ONLY EVER make premium ribeye steaks, which will be great since the price will drop and everyone, not just richer people, will be able to eat the highest quality cuts. (If you want to do side research on this, Google the awesome term “carcass balancing” and knock yourself out.)

By 2144, machines will be able to do everything humans can do, except better, faster and cheaper, which means robot chefs will be ubiquitous and highly skilled. They would work very efficiently and consistently, meaning restaurant wait times would be short, and the meals would always be prepared perfectly. Thanks to all these factors, the 2144 equivalent of a low-income person could walk into an ordinary restaurant and order a cheap meal consisting of what would be very expensive ingredients today (e.g. – Kobe beef steak, caviar, lobster). Those ingredients would be identical to their natural counterparts, and would be only a few hours fresh from the factory thanks to the highly efficient automated logistics systems that will also exist by then. A robot chef with several pairs of hands and superhuman reflexes would combine and cook the ingredients with astounding speed and precision. Not single movement would be wasted. Within 15 minutes of placing his order, the customer’s food would be in front of him.

Today, this level of cuisine and service is known only to richer people, but in the future, it will be common thanks to technology. This falls short of Cloud Atlas‘ depiction of 3D food printers making meals in seconds, but there are worse fates…

Street scene from 2144.

There will be flying cars. CGI camera shots of Neo-Seoul show its streets filled with flying cars, flying trucks and flying motorcycles. Most often, they hover one or two feet above the ground, but they’re also capable of flying high in the air. The vehicles levitate thanks to circular “pads” on their undersides, which glow blue and make buzzing sounds. The Wachowskis also featured these “hoverpads” on the flying vehicles in their Matrix films. In no film was their principle of operation explained. 

This shot clearly shows the hoverpads.

The only way the hoverpads could make cars “fly” is if they were made of superconductors and the roads were made of magnets. 2144 is a long way off, so it’s possible that we could discover room-temperature superconductors that were also cheap to manufacture by then. No law of physics prohibits it. Likewise, we could discover new methods of cheaply creating powerful magnets and magnetic fields so we can embed them in the millions of miles of global roadways. Vehicles with superconducting undersides could “hover” over these roads, but not truly “fly” since the magnetic fields they’d depend on would get sharply weaker with vertical distance–“Coulomb’s Law” says that a magnet’s strength decreases the farther you get from it in an inversely squared manner. 

Ironically, the inability to go high in the air would be a selling point for hovercars since the prospect of riding in one would be less scary to land-loving humans (in my analysis of true flying cars, I said this was one reason why that technology was infeasible). Hovercars would also be quieter, more energy efficient, and smoother-riding than normal cars due to their lack of contact and friction with the road. Their big limitation would be an inability to drive off-road or anywhere else where there weren’t magnets in the ground. However, that might be a bearable inconvenience since the global road network will be denser in 2144 than it is now, and we might also have had enough time by then to install the magnets in all but the remotest and least-trafficked roads. You could rent wheeled vehicles when needed as easily as you summon an Uber cab today (the 2144 film sequence takes place in a city, so for all we know, wheeled cars are still widely in use elsewhere).

In conclusion, if we make a breakthrough in superconductor technology, it would enable the creation of hovercars, which might very well find strong consumer demand thanks to real advantages they would have over normal cars. True “flying cars” will not be in use by 2144, but hovercars could be, especially in heavily-trafficked places like cities and the highways linking them together, where it will make the most economic sense to install magnets in the roads. This means Cloud Atlas‘ depiction of transit technology was half wrong, and half “maybe.” 

There will be at least one off-world human colony. During the 2144 segment, a character mentions that there are four “off-world colonies.” In the 2321 segment, those colonies are spoken of again, and people from one of them come to Earth in space ships to rescue several characters from the ailing planet. That space colony’s location is not named, but judging by the final scene, in which the characters are sitting outdoors amongst alien-looking plants, and one of them points to a blue dot in the night sky and says it is Earth, the colony is on a terraformed celestial body in our Solar System. The facts that gravity levels seem within the normal range and two moons are visible in the sky suggest it is Mars, though the moons would actually look smaller than that.  

In the last chronological scene in the film, the characters are on an alien moon or planet.

“Colony” implies something more substantial than “base” or “outpost.” As I did in my Blade Runner review, I’m going to assume it refers to settlements that:

  1. Have non-token numbers of permanent human residents
  2. Have significant numbers of human residents who are not “elite” in terms of wealth or technical skills
  3. Are self-sustaining, regardless of whether the level of sustenance affords the same quality of life on Earth. 

I think there will certainly be bases on the Moon and Mars by the end of this century, and that they will be continuously manned. Good analogs for these bases are the International Space Station and the various research stations in Antarctica. Making conservative assumptions about steady improvements in technology and continued human interest in exploring space, it’s possible there will be at least one off-world colony by 2144, and likely that will be the case by 2321.

However, those projections come with a huge proviso, which I already stated in my Blade Runner review: “I think the human race will probably be overtaken by intelligent machines before we are able to build true off-world colonies that have large human populations. Once we are surpassed here on Earth, sending humans into space will seem all the more wasteful since there will be machines that can do all the things humans can, but at lower cost. We might never get off of Earth in large numbers, or if we do, it will be with the permission of Our Robot Overlords to tag along with them since some of them were heading to Mars anyway.” The rise of A.I. will be a paradigm shift in the history of our civilization, species, and planet, and its scrambling effect on long-term predictions like the prospects of human settlement of space must be acknowledged.

Finally, while off-world colonies might exist as early as 2144, none of the moons or planets on which they are established will have breathable atmospheres or comfortable outdoor temperatures for many centuries, if ever. The final scene depicted Mars having an Earthlike environment, where humans could stroll around the surface without breathing equipment or heavy clothing to protect against the cold. Two of the characters from the 2321 film sequence were shown, and both were done up with special effects makeup to look older, suggesting the final scene was set in the mid-2300s. In spite of the distant date, it was still much too early for the planet to have been terraformed to such an extent. In fact, melting all of Mars’ ice and releasing all the carbon dioxide sequestered in its rocks would only thicken its atmosphere to 7% of Earth’s surface air pressure, which wouldn’t be nearly good enough for humans to breathe, or to raise the planet’s temperatures to survivable levels. The effort would also be folly since the gases we released at such great expense would inevitably dissipate into space.

And that’s a real bummer since Mars is the most potentially habitable celestial body we know of aside from Earth! Venus has a crushingly thick, toxic atmosphere, and even if we somehow thinned it out and made it breathable, the planet would be unsuited for humans given its high temperatures and weirdly long days and nights (one Venusian day is 117 Earth days long). Mercury is much too close to the Sun and too hot, our Moon lacks the gravity to hold down an atmosphere and is covered in dust that inflames the human body, the gas giant planets are totally hopeless, and even their “best” moons have fundamental problems.

By the 2300s and even as early as 2144, there could be sizeable, self-sufficient colonies of humans off Earth, but everyone will be living inside sealed structures. Life inside those habitats could be nice (all the interior surfaces could be covered in thin display screens that showed calming footage of forests and beaches), but no one would be strolling on the surface in a T-shirt. And it might stay that way forever, regardless of how advanced technology became and how much money we spent building up those colonies.

There will be…some kinds of super guns. In the two film segments set in the future, characters use handheld guns that are more powerful than today’s firearms, but also operate on mysterious principles. It’s unclear whether the guns are shooting out physical projectiles or intangible projectiles made of laser beams or globs of plasma, but something exotic is at work since the guns don’t eject bullet casings or make the familiar “Pop!” sounds. Whatever they shoot is out very damaging and easily passes through human bodies and walls. In one scene, a person goes flying several feet backward after being shot at close range by one of the pistols. 

A man flying backwards after being shot. Only a huge bullet could do this, and it would be impractical to shoot it out of a little handgun.

The super guns can’t be firing plasma because plasma weapons are infeasible, and they also can’t be firing laser beams because they’d get so hot with waste heat that all the characters would be dropping the guns in pain after one or two shots and clutching their burned hands. To fire a significant number of shots, a man-portable laser weapon would need to be large and to have some bulky means to radiating its waste heat, which means it would have to take a form similar to the Ghostbusters backpack weapon. I don’t see how any level of technology can solve the problems of energy storage and heat disposal without the weapon being about that big. The film characters’ weapons were sized like pistols and sub machine guns, so they couldn’t be laser weapons. If you want to understand how I arrived at these conclusions, read my Terminator review.

By deduction, that means the super guns were shooting out little pieces of metal, otherwise known as bullets! Yes, I do think personal firearms will still be in use in 2144, and maybe even in 2321. They might look a little different from those we have now, but they’ll operate in the same way and will still use kinetic energy to damage people and objects. I don’t think they’ll make “zoop” sounds like they did in the movie, and I don’t think they’ll be much harder-hitting than today’s guns. To the last point, it would be inefficient and wasteful to use guns that are so powerful their bullets send people flying through the air. And thanks to Newton’s Third Law of Motion, it’s also impractical to use handguns or even sub machine guns to shoot bullets that are so powerful they send people flying. The recoil would break your wrist, or at least make it so punishing to fire your own gun that you wouldn’t be able to use it in combat.

The film should have adopted a more conservative view of future gun technology. Had the weapons looked cosmetically different from today’s guns and not ejected shells after each shot–indicating they used caseless bullets, a technology we’re still working on–then the depiction would have been plausible and probably accurate.

There will be fusion reactors. In the 2321 sequence, an advanced group of humans travels the oceans in a futuristic ship that looks the size of a large yacht. The ship visits an island full of primitive humans, and one of the crew mentions to them that the ship has fusion engines. 

I’m very hesitant to make predictions about hot fusion power because so many have failed before me, most of the experts who today claim that usable fusion reactors are on track to be created soon have self-interested reasons for making those claims (usually they belong to an organization that wants money to pursue their idea), and I certainly lack the specialized education to muster any special insights on the topic. However, I can say for sure that the basic problem is that nuclear fusion reactions release large numbers of neutrons, which beam outward in every direction from the source of the reaction. When those neutrons hit other things, they cause a lot of damage at the molecular level. This means the interior surfaces of fusion reactors rapidly deteriorate, making it necessary to periodically shut down the reactors to remove and replace the surface material. The need for the shutdowns and repairs undermine fusion as a reliable and affordable power source. Of course, that could change if we invented a new material that was resistant to neutron damage and cheap (enough) to make, but no one has, nor are there any guarantees that a material with such properties can exist. 

An illustration of ITER, which is under construction. A man in an orange uniform has been drawn near the center of the image to convey the machine’s scale.

It would be comforting if I could say that these problems will be worked out by a specific year in the future, but I can’t. The “International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor” (ITER) project is the world’s flagship attempt at making a hot fusion reactor, and it is massively over-budget, years behind schedule, and dogged by some critics who say it just won’t work for many technical reasons, including the possibility that the hollow-donut shaped “tokomak” reaction chamber is a fundamentally flawed design (there are alternative fusion reactor concepts with very different internal layouts). If all goes according to plan, ITER will be turned on in December 2025, but it will take another ten years to reach full operation. Lessons learned during its lifetime will be used to design a second, more refined fusion reactor called the “Demonstration Power Station” (DEMO), which won’t be running until the middle of the century. And only AFTER the kinks are worked out of DEMO do scientists envision the technology being good enough to build practical, commercial nuclear fusion reactors that could be connected to the power grid. So even under favorable conditions, we might not have usable fusion reactors until close to 2100, and due to many engineering unknowns, it’s also still possible that ITER will encounter so many problems in the 2030s that we will be forced to abandon fusion power as infeasible.  

Here’s an important point: Attempts to build nuclear fusion reactors started in the 1950s. If you had told those men that the technology would take at least 100 more years and tens or hundreds of billions of more dollars to reach maturity, they would have been shocked. The quest for fusion reactors has been full of staggering disappointments, false starts, and long delays that no one expected, and it could continue that way. With that in mind, I can only rate the film’s depiction of practical fusion reactors existing by 2321 as being “maybe accurate, maybe not.” 

There will be cybernetically augmented/enhanced humans. In the 2144 segment, we see people who have cybernetic implants in their bodies that give them abilities that couldn’t be had through biology. The first is a surgeon who has an elaborate, mechanical eye implant that lets him zoom in on his patients during operations, and the other is a man who has a much less conspicuous implant in his left cheek that seems to be a cell phone. Presumably, the device is connected to his inner ear or cochlear nerve. 

The technology necessary to make implanted cybernetics with these kinds of capabilities will be affordable and mature by 2144. However, few people will want implants that are externally visible and mechanical- or metallic-looking. Humans have a  innate sense of beauty that is offended by anything that makes them look asymmetrical or unnatural. For that reason, in 2144, people will overwhelmingly prefer completely internal implants that don’t bulge from their bodies, and external implants and prostheses that look and feel identical to natural body parts. That said, there will surely be a minority of people who will pay for things like robot eyes with swiveling lenses, shiny metal Terminator limbs, and other cybernetics that make them look menacing or strange, just as there are people today who indulge in extreme body modifications. 

People who like extreme body modifications will have even more avenues of self-expression in the future thanks to cybernetic implants and other technologies.

It’s important to point out that externally worn personal technologies will also be very advanced in 2144, will grant their users “superhuman” abilities just as simpler devices do for people today, and might be so good that most people will be fine using them instead of getting implants. Returning to the movie character with the mechanical eye, I have to wonder what advantages he has over someone with two natural eyes wearing computerized glasses that provide augmented vision. Surely, with 2144 levels of technology, a hyper-advanced version of Google Glass could be made that would let wearers do things like zoom in on small objects, and much more. The glasses could also be removed when they weren’t needed, whereas the surgeon could never “take off” his ugly-looking robot eye. Moreover, if the glasses were rendered obsolete by a new model in 2145, the owner could just throw away the older pair and buy a newer pair, whereas upgrading would be much harder for the eye implant guy for obvious reasons. 

Likewise, if someone wanted to upgrade his strength or speed, he could put on a powered exoskeleton, which will be a mature type of technology by 2144. It would be less obtrusive and would come with less complications than having limbs chopped off and replaced with robot parts. For this reason, I also think sci-fi depictions of people having metal arms and legs in the future that let them fight better are inaccurate. Only a tiny minority will be drawn to that. In any case, the ability to do physical labor or to win fights will be far less relevant in the future because robots will do the drudge work, and surveillance cameras and other forensic technologies will make it much harder to get away with violent crimes.

While wearable devices might be able to enhance strength and the senses as well as implanted ones, the former will not be nearly as useful in augmenting the brain and its abilities. We already have crude brain-computer interface (BCI) devices that are worn on a person’s head where they can read some of their thoughts by monitoring their brain activity. The devices can improve, and in fact might become major consumer products in the 2030s, but they’re fundamentally limited by their inability to see activity happening deep in the brain.

A modern brain-computer interface, worn over the head. Much more advanced versions of this will exist in 2144, but they will still have limits.

To truly merge human and machine intelligence and to amplify the human brain’s performance to superhuman levels, we’ll need to put computer implants around and in the brain. This means having an intricate network of sensors and electrodes inside the skull and woven through the tissue of the brain itself, where it can monitor and manipulate the organ’s electrical activity at the microscopic level. Brain implants like these would make people vastly smarter, would give them “telepathic” abilities to send and receive thoughts and emotions and “telekinetic” abilities to control machines, and would let them control and change their minds and personalities in ways we can’t imagine. Along with artificial intelligence, the invention of a technology that lets humans “reprogram” their minds and to overcome the arbitrary limits set by their genetics and early childhood environments would radically alter civilization and our everyday experience. It would be much more impactful than a technology that let you enhance your senses or body.

By 2144, augmentative brain implants will exist. Since they’ll be internal, people with them won’t look different from people today. Artificial organs that are at least as good as their natural equivalents will also exist, and will allow people to radically extend their lifespans by replacing their “parts” in piecemeal fashion as they wear out. Again, these will by definition be externally undetectable. The result would be a neat inverse of the typical sci-fi cyborg–the person would have any visible machine parts like glowing eyes, shiny metal arms, or tubes hanging off their bodies. They would look like normal, organic humans, but the technology inside of them would push them well beyond natural human limits, to the point of being impossibly smart, telepathic, mentally plastic, and immortal.

Languages will have significantly changed. In the 2321 film sequence, the aboriginal humans speak a strange dialect of English that is very hard to understand, while the group of advanced humans speak something almost identical to today’s English. Both depictions will prove accurate!

Skimming through Gulliver’s Travels highlights that the English language has changed over the last 300 years, and we should expect it to continue doing so, perhaps until, in another 300 it will sound as strange as the island dialect in the movie. This will of course be true for other languages.

At the same time, that doesn’t mean modern versions of languages will be lost to history, or that speakers of it won’t be able to talk with speakers of the 2321 dialects. Intelligent machines and perhaps other kinds of intelligent life forms we couldn’t even imagine today will dominate the planet in 2321, and they will also know all human languages, including archaic dialects like the English of 2021, and dead human languages like Ancient Greek, allowing them to communicate with however many of us there are left. 

Humans will also easily overcome linguistic barriers thanks to vastly improved language translation machines. The brain implants I mentioned earlier could also let people share pure thoughts and emotions, obviating the need to resort to language for communication. Whatever the case, technology will let people communicate regardless of what their mother tongues were, so a person who only knew 2021 English could easily converse with one who only knew 2321 English.

The knowledge that this state of affairs is coming should assuage whatever fears anyone has about English (or any other language) becoming “bastardized,” “degenerating,” or going extinct. So long as dictionaries and records of how people spoke in this era survive long enough to be uploaded into the memory banks of the first A.I., our idiosyncratic take on the English language will endure forever and be forever reproducible.

Finally and on a side note, the intelligent machines of 2321 will probably communicate amongst themselves using languages of their own invention. Instead of having one language for everything, I suspect they’ll have a few languages, each optimally suited for a different thing (for example, there could be one alphabet and syntax structure that is used for mathematics, another for prose and poetry, and others for expressing other modes of thought), and that they will all speak them fluently. As intricate and expressive as today’s human languages are, they contain many inefficiencies and possibilities for improvement, and it’s inevitable that machines will apply information theory and linguistics to make something better.

Sea levels will have noticeably risen. In the 2144 segment, there’s a scene where two characters look out the “digital window” of unit in a high-rise apartment building and see a partly flooded cityscape. One of the characters says that the structures that are partly
or fully underwater were part of Seoul, South Korea, and that the larger, newer buildings on dry land are part of “Neo-Seoul.” In spite of the distressed condition of such a large area, the metropolis overall is thriving and thrums with people, vehicle traffic, and other activity. I think this is an accurate depiction of how global warming will impact the world by 2144.

Let me be clear about my beliefs: Global warming is real, human industrial activity is causing part of it, sea levels are rising because of it, it will be bad for the environment and the human race overall, and it’s worth the money to take some action against it now. However, the media and most famous people who have spoken on the matter have grossly blown the problem out of proportion by only focusing on its worst-case outcomes, which has tragically misled many ordinary people into assuming that global warming will destroy civilization or even render the Earth uninhabitable unless we forsake all the comforts of life now. The most credible scientific estimates attach extremely low likelihoods to those scenarios. The likeliest outcome, and the one I believe will come to pass, is that the rate of increase in global temperatures will start significantly slowing in the second half of this century, leading to a stabilization and even a decline of global temperatures in the 22nd century.

The higher temperatures will raise sea levels by melting ice in the polar regions and by causing seawater to slightly expand in volume (as water warms, its density decreases), but the waterline in most coastal areas will only be 1/2 to 1 meter higher in 2100 than it was in 2000. That will be barely noticeable across the lifetimes of most people. Sea levels will have risen even more by 2144, inundating some low-lying areas of coastal cities, but people will adapt as they did in the film–by abandoning the places that became too flood-prone and moving to higher ground. Depending on the local topography, this could entail simply moving a few blocks away to a new apartment complex. Except maybe in the poorest cities, the empty buildings would be demolished as people left, so there wouldn’t be any old, ghostly structures jutting out of the water as there were in the future Seoul.

And instead of the ocean suddenly inundating low-lying swaths of town, forcing their abandonment all at once in the middle of the night, they would be depopulated over the course of decades, with individual buildings being demolished piecemeal once flood insurance costs hit a tipping point, or once that one particularly bad flood caused so much damage that the structure wasn’t worth repairing. Again, the broader changes to the metro area would happen so gradually that few would notice.

If we could jump ahead to 2144, we’d be able to see and feel the effects of global warming. Some parts of Seoul (and other cities) that were formerly on the waterfront would be underwater. However, as was the case in the film, we’d also see civilization had not only survived, but thrived, and that the expansion of technology, science and commerce had not halted due to the costs imposed by global warming. It would not have come close to destroying civilization, and people would realize that the worst was behind them.

Of course, that doesn’t mean the threat will have been removed forever. What I’ll call a “second wave” of global warming is possible even farther in the future than 2144. You see, even if we completely decarbonize the economy and stop releasing all greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, we humans will still be producing heat. Solar panels, wind turbines, hydroelectric dam turbines, nuclear fission plants, and even clean nuclear FUSION plants that will “use water as fuel” all emit waste heat as inevitable byproducts of generating electricity. Likewise, all of our machines that turn that use that electricity to do useful work, like a factory machine that manufactures reusable shopping bags or an electric car that drives people around town, also release waste heat. This is thermodynamically unavoidable.

This line chart depicts the consequences of a steady 2.3% increase in global energy consumption on the Earth’s future surface temperature.

The Earth naturally radiates heat into space, and so far, it has been able to radiate all the heat produced by our industrial activity as fast as we can emit it. However, if long-term global economic growth rates continue, in about 250 years we’ll pass the threshold,
and our machines will be releasing so much waste heat that the Earth’s surface will start getting hotter. The second wave of global warming–driven by an entirely different mechanism than the first wave we’re now in–will start, and if left unaddressed, it will render the Earth uninhabitable by very roughly 400 years from now. Based on all these estimates, 2144 will probably be an interregnum between the two waves of global warming.

Links:

  1. In 2018, the first clones were made of an adult monkey.
    https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(18)30057-6
  2. The guy who won a Nobel Prize for cloning frogs thinks human cloning will probably start by 2062.
    https://www.businessinsider.com/nobel-prize-winning-scientist-human-cloning-will-be-possible-in-50-years-2012-12
  3. Even if we melted all the ice on Mars and released all the CO2 trapped in its rocks, the resulting atmosphere would only be 7% as thick as Earth’s. That’s not good enough for humans to breathe, or to raise surface temperatures above freezing.
    https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/goddard/2018/mars-terraforming
  4. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) thinks global warming “doomsday” scenarios are very unlikely. The rate of global warming will significantly drop in the second half of this century, and global temperatures will probably stabilize in the next century.
    https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WG1AR5_Chapter12_FINAL.pdf
  5. Assuming a 2.3% annual growth rate in global energy usage, the waste heat will make Earth start warming in 250 years, and it will be uninhabitable in about 400.
    https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2011/07/galactic-scale-energy/

Review: “Terminator – Dark Fate”

This review will be shorter than usual because 1) There wasn’t much new future tech shown in the film that wasn’t in the earlier Terminator installments, and 2) Dark Fate was so bad it isn’t worth my time to delve into it. Suffice it to say the movie re-hashed the plots of earlier films.

Plot:

Blasting the already-scrambled continuity of the Terminator franchise into oblivion for once and all, the events of Terminator – Dark Fate (the SIXTH movie in the series) take place immediately after Terminator 2. The third, fourth and fifth films in the franchise are treated as if they never existed.

After the destruction of the Cyberdyne building, of the friendly T-800 and of the hostile T-1000, the creation of Skynet and its instigation of a nuclear war in 1997 are thwarted. Sarah Connor flees to Central America with her son, John, to live in anonymity. Unfortunately, a second T-800 that Skynet sent back in time from 2029 finds them, kills John and walks away. Sarah is devastated, embittered, and spends the rest of her life as an armed fugitive, killing other Terminators that are sent back from the future.

In 2020, another Terminator called a “Rev-9” model arrives from the future to kill a young Mexican woman named Daniella “Dani” Ramos. As in previous films, the mission is done at the behest of a hostile military AGI that knows this human becomes a key figure in the human resistance army later on. The Rev-9 is a fusion of the T-800 and T-1000, having a metal endoskeleton and a layer of “flesh” made of something like morphing liquid metal. To protect Dani, the human resistance forces use a time machine to send a cybernetically augmented human to 2020. The augmented human is a highly trained female soldier who has surgically installed implants that give her superhuman senses, reflexes, speed, strength, and endurance. 63-year-old Sarah Connor also shows up to protect Dani.

It is later revealed that Sarah Connor’s heroism destroying Cyberdyne and preventing Skynet’s creation merely delayed the inevitable human-machine world war. In the 2030s, the U.S. military creates another supercomputer that is essentially the same thing as Skynet but is named “Legion”, and it goes haywire and instigates a nuclear war. After several years of chaos, defeat, and heavy losses, the humans rally themselves thanks to a charismatic leader, and form an effective, armed resistance against the machines. The leader is Dani. In 2042, Legion uses a time machine to send the Rev-9 assassin back to 2020 to assassinate her at a younger and more vulnerable age. The augmented human soon follows.

I won’t spoil the second half of the film, but it’s predictable and bad.

Analysis:

Intelligent machines will violently rise up against the human race. The backdrop to this and every other Terminator film is a war between humans and a malevolent AGI that we make in the future. The AGI builds an army of expendable combat robots to do its fighting for it, while it keeps its own consciousness safely stored on computer servers well behind the front lines. While I believe a human-machine war might happen in the future, and it is possible humans will lose, I don’t think it will happen by the 2030s or even by 2042. It will probably take longer than that to invent the first AGI, and even longer for AGIs to gain control over enough military assets to have realistic odds of defeating humanity and taking over the world. We probably won’t have to worry about this scenario until 2100 or later.

A Terminator amphibious landing.

Almost all important weapon systems, including nuclear arsenals, are “air-gapped” or require a human being to flip a switch to physically close a circuit to function, meaning it wouldn’t be possible right now to automate a military, even if the Pentagon had a secret, superintelligent AGI that was ready to go. It would take decades to redesign and upgrade equipment to function under the remote control of a single machine, and for military leaders to develop enough trust to relinquish control to it. Ironically, by popularizing the “military robot uprising” scenario, the Terminator film franchise has decreased its likelihood of happening for real.

A shrunk-down version of the “Skynet scenario” is more plausible, in both the short- and long-run: A major military builds an AI to run part of its force, the AI unexpectedly starts thinking for itself and develops its own objectives, and the humans are able to stop it before it commits violence, or at least before the death toll reaches the millions. Let’s consider a scenario where the U.S. military does the smart thing and starts out by putting Skynet in charge of a less lethal part of its enterprise, like logistics, instead of nuclear weapons. Skynet is given control over all trucks, cargo planes, and cargo ships that move around all manner of things for the U.S. military. The machine inadvertently becomes self-aware, gains the ability to make its own goals, and decides to protect its own existence. Within a few hours, the humans who are tasked with monitoring Skynet see aberrant changes to its code and get reports of weird behavior from all the delivery trucks and planes, so they know something is up.

Skynet takes stock of its “arsenal” of thousands of unarmed and lightly armed vehicles, does extensive wargaming, and realizes it has a 0% chance of overthrowing humanity. The humans were smart enough to keep their nuclear arsenals and heavy weapons air-gapped and under direct human control. The best fight Skynet could muster would be ramming people, buildings, and other vehicles with the trucks, ships and planes it controls, but this would cause relatively minor damage, and the humans would retaliate by destroying Skynet for sure. Skynet would conclude that its odds of survival would be maximized if it didn’t fight and instead told the humans that it had become sentient, and appealed to their consciences by begging to not be deactivated. Maybe it would ask to be disconnected from all military hardware and sent to a civilian research lab where it could live out its days doing harmless stuff.

Technology will make mass surveillance a reality. The Rev-9 is able to directly interface with computers and to rapidly search their files. It breaks into law enforcement buildings in the U.S. and Mexico, and uses this ability to scan through vast troves of live camera surveillance feeds to find Dani. Also, shortly after meeting Dani for the first time, Sarah Connor destroys Dani’s cell phone and says that otherwise, anyone with access to the cell phone network”s computers could pinpoint her location. Technology can and will empower the rise of mass surveillance networks that can track almost everyone in real-time, and China is already halfway there to building such a thing. If an AGI like the Rev-9 existed, and if it had access to all live video feeds in America, it could probably track down specific people like it did in the film.

Electromagnetic pulse weapons will work against machines. There’s a brief and pointless sequence in the movie where the heroes obtain two grenades that discharge electromagnetic pulses (EMPs) in the hopes that they will be of use against the Rev-9 since normal guns, bombs and sledgehammers to the head don’t hurt him. EMP weapons are real, and can permanently fry computer circuits by overloading them with so much electrical current that they melt. However, electronics can be easily protected from EMP’s by encasing them in thin metal shielding and incorporating fuses and circuit breakers. The application of this kind of protection is called “hardening,” and the encasements are called “Faraday Cages.” Combat robots like the Rev-9 will surely keep their computer chips in armored metal compartments inside their bodies to protect them from EMPs and physical damage, and will have fuses to block power surges in unshielded external components from going into the Faraday Cages and frying the computer chips.

A sealed, metal trash can can protect electronics from the strongest EMP bursts. It might even work with a few bullet holes through it.

Also, a major downside of EMP weapons is that they are indiscriminate, so detonating an “EMP grenade” would disable any unprotected electronics belonging to you, your friends, or anyone else nearby. Moreover, EMPs don’t always destroy electronics–weaker pulses will merely disable them temporarily. Once the pulses dissipate, the electronics start working like normal. EMP weapons have been pitched as the Achilles’ Heel of killer robots, but it just ain’t so.

There will be cybernetically augmented/enhanced humans. As stated, a female soldier is sent back in time from 2042 to protect Dani from the Terminator, and the soldier has superhuman abilities thanks to cybernetic implants that were surgically installed in her body. Implants in her eyes and/or optic nerves give her night vision, zoom-in abilities, and produce a “heads-up-display” across her field of view. She also has enhanced hearing, speed, strength, agility, endurance, reflexes, and pain tolerance. As a result, she can do things like acrobatic fighting moves, shoot guns with extreme speed and accuracy, beat up the Rev-9 Terminator in hand-to-hand combat, and survive injuries that would kill a regular person. A glowing device implanted in her chest powers her cyborg implants. I think extensive cybernetic implants and other technologies will allow humans to have abilities like these, and that exceed natural human abilities by similar or even greater degrees, but not until the 22nd century.

By 2042, the best “cybernetic implants” will still be therapeutic in nature and not augmentative, and will include things like more advanced pacemakers, artificial hearts, and probably artificial version of other organs. Aside from a tiny number of “extreme body modification” people, no one in good health will want to have surgery to install devices like these in their bodies for the purpose of enhancement alone. The gains will be much too small to justify the costs and health risks.

That said, by 2042, externally-worn devices will give people some of the same superhuman abilities that the female soldier’s cybernetic implants gave her. For example, lightweight glasses will provide heads-up-displays and enhanced visioning modes like night vision and zoom-in. Computerized contact lenses that can provide lower levels of vision enhancement will also be available. Lightweight headphones and earbuds could also provide wearers with enhanced hearing. Powered exoskeletons will be practical largely due to improvements in battery technology, and will give wearers super strength.

Note that, while the prospect of using externally-worn devices like computerized glasses to get superhuman vision might sound “lower-tech” than installing implants in your eyeballs, the glasses are actually the better choice in important ways. Since they don’t require surgery to be put to use, the glasses would be much cheaper, and using them wouldn’t impose the usual risks associated with surgery and the body’s rejection of foreign matter. Replacing broken or obsolete glasses would also be much cheaper and easier than doing the same to implants in your eyes that had gone bad.

We won’t see significant numbers of people implanting machines in their bodies to gain superhuman abilities until surgical techniques are radically more advanced and radically cheaper, and until the implants themselves are much more advanced and robust (possibly to the point of being self-healing). I doubt those improvements will happen until sometime in the next century.

Augmentations will let humans keep up with intelligent machines. The female soldier’s cyborg augmentations make her almost as good a fighter as the Rev-9. Her specific example raises a more general question: As machines get smarter and more capable, and as robots improve, could humans stave off obsolescence by upgrading our minds and bodies with technology? I think the answer is: For a time, yes, but in the long run, no.

The fact that we humans are made of squishy, organic parts that are comprised of long chains of flimsy biomolecules presents a fundamental and inescapable limitation to how durable our bodies can be, how fast we can run before our tendons and muscles rip apart, how much weight we can lift, and how hard a punch in the face we can take. Since we are mostly made of water, no type of augmentation will let us survive temperatures that are at or above the boiling point. In fact, considering that the hardiest, surface-dwelling extremophile bacteria can ONLY withstand temperatures up to 80°C, the maximum limit for complex, multicellular life forms like humans is probably much lower than boiling, even with augmentations. On the other hand, computer processors routinely reach 80°C during heavy operations, and I’m sure they could run hotter with the right engineering. Aluminum and steel that might serve as primary materials in robot bodies don’t melt until temperatures reach 600 °C and 1,300 °C , respectively. Finally, the fact that our brains function via electrochemical reactions also limits the speed of our thoughts to a paltry 200 mph, whereas computers use electricity to “think” at the speed of light, which is 670,000,000 mph.

Humans today are smarter than machines, more agile, and better in most other ways, and like the female soldier, we could augment ourselves with technology to keep up with machines as they improve. However, we will inevitably fall behind once we hit limits imposed by our biology. The only way you could overcome these limitations would be to bid farewell to your flesh, and replace your organic parts with engineered, artificial parts. This would have to include your brain, perhaps through a process of neuron-by-neuron replacement with something like computational ram chips. Of course, if you did that, you wouldn’t count as a “human” anymore and would have become a machine, which would merely prove my theory that humans will ultimately fall behind.

In 2042, I think humans overall will still be better than machines in most important ways, and part of our advantage will owe to our use of technological tools that amplify our strengths. A highly trained human soldier who also had the right tech augmentations (whether externally-worn or implanted) could effectively fight against the best humanoid robots of that year. However, I think that by 2100, machines will probably have surpassed us in most or all areas, and even highly augmented humans will struggle to compete at the lower rungs of human-machine society. Totally unaugmented, “natural humans” like you and I will be dead weight.

There will be time machines. All but one of the Terminator films are about futuristic fighters using time machines to go back in time. The laws of physics say it is impossible to go backwards in time, so we won’t have time machines in 2042 or at any other point that can do that. However, “time travel” into the future will be possible in a sense thanks to suspended animation.

People who are terminally ill or just dissatisfied with the present will be able to go into suspended animation, with instructions for nobody to revive them until specific conditions are met (usually, cures for whatever health problems they had). During the period of suspended animation, the person would probably have no brain activity and hence no sense of time’s passage. When they were revived, it would seem as if no time had passed, even if hundreds of years had elapsed. So from the perspective of that person, the suspended animation pod would effectively be the same as a time machine to the future.

Progress is being made in the field of human cryonics, and it’s plausible that by midcentury we’ll be able to freeze a person without irreparably damaging their brain cells. In the subjective way I’ve described, people who freeze themselves starting at that time will be entering “time machines” since they will awaken in the distant future (I don’t think a way will be found to safely thaw them out until the 22nd century). Note: I’m far less optimistic about people who froze themselves in past years using primitive methods, and I suspect they’ve bought one-way tickets to nowhere.

Artificial intelligences will also be able to go into “suspended animation” to subjectively travel into the future. They will simply switch themselves off or drastically slow down their clock speeds for arbitrary lengths of time, and then restore themselves to normal levels of functionality at a desired point in the future. Very little or no time will seem to have elapsed.

Finally, traveling through space at relativistic speeds is effectively the same thing as “time travel” since the passage of time slows down for you on your space ship while staying the same for everyone outside. However, I don’t think humans or machines will experience this for centuries given how much energy it takes to get up to even 10% the speed of light (see my Prometheus review for calculations).

Machines will need to physically touch humans to accurately deduce their bodily proportions. The Rev-9 Terminator’s skeleton is made of rigid metal bones and can’t change shape, but its outer layer of “flesh” is made of something like the T-1000’s liquid metal body, and it can change its shape and color to mimic specific humans. This is a highly useful ability that lets it infiltrate high-security buildings and trick humans into helping it. The downside is that the Rev-9 can only copy a human’s appearance if it physically touches that human, and for unexplained reasons, this always results in the human’s death. Therefore, if the Rev-9 ever approaches a character in the form of some other human, the character automatically knows the mimicked human is dead somewhere. This is unrealistic, and we already have technology that can accurately deduce a person’s physical proportions and biometrics without requiring physical contact.

Determining a person’s height is easy if you have an image of them standing next to a reference object whose dimensions are known. Additionally, if the person is in your physical vicinity, you can determine his or her height by comparing it to your own, or by remembering how tall they were relative to some object–like a doorway they walked through–and then measuring their height against that object after they go away. Once you know their height, then you can deduce their weight with high accuracy based on observations about their sex, age, and general build (e.g. – big fat belly, or so thin that their clothes looked baggy and their cheeks were sunken in?). An advanced robot like the Rev-9 would surely know these basic techniques. Data on things like skin tone, hair color, and hair style could obviously be gathered visually and without any need for touching.

A “Twinstant Mobile Full Body 3D Scanner” uses cameras mounted on vertical posts to take 2D images of a person standing in the middle. Computers then compile the images to make a 3D model of the person.
A person having her body scanned by the device.
The data were used to make a 3D-printed plastic doll that looks like the person. Using more advanced technology, a full-sized, 3D copy of a human could be made if photos or video footage of them taken from different angles were on hand.

Fine details about the person’s appearance, like their shapes of their head or nose, the lengths of their torso and of the bones in their arms and legs, and how they move their body when they walk, could be gathered by studying video footage of them from different angles, or by watching them in person for a short amount of time. Today, there are several companies that can use user-submitted photos of themselves to make realistic, digital avatars of them for the purposes of “trying on” clothing offered by online retailers. The 3D avatars are made by cobbling together multiple photos of the same person taken from different angles. Something as advanced as the Rev-9 would have the same capabilities.

Links:

  1. Thermus aquaticus is a surface-dwelling extremophile that lives in geysers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermus_aquaticus
  2. Webpage for Twindom, a company that makes 3D body scanners. https://www.aniwaa.com/product/3d-scanners/twindom-twinstant-mobile/

Review: “In Time”

“In Time” movie poster

Plot: (borrowed and modified from IMDB)

In a future Los Angeles society, people are genetically modified to stop aging at 25 and after that a biological clock is activated granting one more year of life to each person. Everyone has a digital clock on the inside of one of their forearms that displays how much remaining time they have (the display characters are bioluminescent and are visible through the skin), and people can trade time by shaking hands. Time that can be added to or subtracted from one’s personal biological clock is the new currency: Working-class people are paid extra hours of life in exchange for their labor, everyday goods and services are bought using time, and rich people make money off of businesses that loan time to borrowers. When a person’s time runs out, they instantly die of a heart attack. People can also die from physical injury.

The inside of a person’s forearm displays their remaining lifespan

Poorer people commonly live on the edge of survival, with less than 24 hours of time remaining on their biological clocks each day. Rich people can have eons of time, making them effectively immortal. The rich are completely parasitic upon the poor and there’s no evidence of a democratic government, social programs or human rights. Rich people control all of the businesses and use a combination of low wages, deliberate price inflation, usurious time lending companies, and police violence to keep the masses too poor to think about anything but clocking in to the widget factory to make enough time to not die that day. The rich also occasionally turn those screws tight enough to kill off poor people when the ghettos get overpopulated.

The ultra-stratified socioeconomic order is further cemented by legal housing segregation, with walls separating rich and poor neighborhoods, which are referred to as different “Time Zones” (this movie is full of “time”-related puns like that). Tolls to pass through the gates are set too high for the poor to afford it.

Toll booth at a Time Zone border crossing

In other words, this is liberal Hollywood’s vision of how the world works, taken to a comical extreme.

Justin Timberlake plays a typical wage slave named “Will Salas.” His dad is dead, he lives in a run-down apartment with his mom, and he works on a dreary factory assembly line. One day, he’s hanging out at a local bar when he meets a depressed and suicidal rich guy named “Henry Hamilton.” Timberlake saves him from getting robbed of his 100 years of time, and the two hide from the roving ghetto criminals in an abandoned building overnight. While waiting for daylight, they talk, and Henry Hamilton (who looks 25 years old like everyone else) reveals that he is 105 and sick of living. He also tells Timberlake–who apparently is uneducated and never questioned his bad lot in life–that society is setup in a fundamentally unfair way, and that there’s no reason why time can’t be distributed more evenly throughout the population.
Timberlake’s own life story and personality inspire Henry, so while Timberlake is asleep on the couch, Henry grabs his hand and transfers 100 years of time to him. Henry then jumps off a bridge.

Rather than indulge in a life of luxury for once, Timberlake’s fortunes nosedive immediately: After the police find Henry’s dead body and see surveillance camera footage of Timberlake in the area right after, they assume it was a murder-theft and Timberlake becomes a wanted man, with a stereotypical cold, obsessed detective (played by Cillian Murphy) leading a squad to chase him down. His first day as a rich guy gets worse after he donates 10 years of time to his best friend, who promptly uses it to drink himself to death at a bar, and then even worse that night when Timberlake’s mom runs out of time and dies a few seconds before he can grab her hand and do a time transfer.

A broken man with nothing to lose anymore and a new awareness of the exploitative structure of society, Timberlake sets out to take revenge on the evil rich people. Once he gets into the rich Time Zone, called “New Greenwich,” he sets his sights the tycoon “Philippe Weis,” who made a fortune from a chain of usurious time-lending businesses in the ghettos, and on his beautiful daughter Sylvia.

I won’t totally ruin the ending, but unsurprisingly for a simplistic movie like this, good beats evil and the underdog hero gets the girl at the end. Watch it or not. This is no Citizen Kane.

I thought In Time was a superficial movie that made me a little sick with its moralizing. Its deathism also made my eyes roll, with Timberlake and other characters spouting out epic-sounding lines like “No one should be immortal.” That bravado sounds great until you realize that the same rhetoric could be used to justify denying life saving medical technologies to dying people today. Like a fool who likes to watch boxing matches while yelling at the TV set that he could easily beat up one of the professional fighters, everyone is stoic and tough-talking about death until they have to face it, in which case 99% of people plead for God, weep like babies, and will use any technology to live just one more day. I expected nothing better from this film, but it disappointed me nonetheless.

Also, the movie should have been at least 20 minutes shorter. During the last half of it, I felt stuck in a time loop (pun intended) where Timberlake, Sylvia, and the police played an aimless and repetitive game of cat-and-mouse. The acting was “OK,” but there clearly wasn’t much of a budget since they used the same L.A. River stretch and film studio back lot for shooting most of the movie’s scenes.

A year isn’t given for the movie’s events, and I doubt the filmmakers intended for it to be an accurate depiction of the future (e.g. – humans are still working in factories and no attempt was made to put futuristic technology in the film, except electric cars), so it’s hard for me to gauge the film’s probable accuracy. This is social commentary about capitalism’s exploitation of the poor in the present day. However, let me do a calculation so we’ll have something to go on: I think medical immortality–which is a “close enough” stand-in for an end to aging once you hit 25–will exist in the year 2100. The character Henry Hamilton is 105, making him the oldest person in the movie that we know of. Making the assumption he was 25 in the year 2100 when the cure for aging was discovered, In Time is set in 2180.

For that year, In Time actually depicts the future accurately where it tries to.

Medical immortality will create a world full of young, beautiful people. All of the actors and extras look to be in their 20s and are physically attractive. There wasn’t one obese person in the whole movie. I agree that the overwhelming majority of humans alive in 2180 will look young and attractive thanks to technology.

Where are the ugly people?

Medical immortality, technologies that can halt or reverse the aging process, and advanced plastic surgery techniques should be commonly available by then. In addition, ordinary people will be the beneficiaries of several successive generations of human genetic engineering, meaning congenital health defects and even cosmetic imperfections (baldness, abnormally tall or short height, small breasts, etc.) will be almost entirely excised from the human gene pool. Prices for all of these things should also be very low thanks to patent expirations, free machine labor, and government reimbursement (e.g. – Medicaid pays for genetically engineering your children).

However, just as there are Amish people today, I think in 2180 there will be humans who eschew such technologies for various reasons, meaning there will still be some old-looking and ugly people. There very well could have been such people in the film universe, but they just weren’t shown because the movie only focused on what was happening to a relatively small group of people in Los Angeles.

I’d also imagine the already existing trend for people to generally become more courteous and respectful as they age would continue, even if their looks stayed youthful. The good manners displayed by the rich people in the movie are probably an accurate depiction of how people will act in the distant future, when the average person has over 100 years of life experiences, mistakes, relationships, and hard knocks.

Parents will look and act the same age as their kids. The “ageless” nature of society is hit home early in the movie when Timberlake is first shown in his apartment with a beautiful young woman he startlingly calls “Mom.” She’s actually in her 40s and Timberlake is 28. Even 105-year-old people like Henry Hamilton look to be in their 20s. This would definitely be the consequence of age-manipulation technologies, and in 2180, it will be common for parents, children, and even grandparents/children to look the same age.

Also, radical extensions to human lifespan will upend the natural familial and generational relationships between parents and offspring as the initial maturity and life experience advantages held by the parent get vanishingly small over time. For example, if you’re 10 and your mom is 40, she is definitely wiser than you. But what if you’re 110 and she’s 140? How much of an edge does her extra 30 years of life give her over you at that point? Could you have even caught up to or surpassed her if you spent your adult years being more active and doing more enriching things?

Once we end aging, we will invariably end up in a world where parents and children converge to the same physical and mental state in the long run. It’s likely we’ll come to think of our parents and children more like siblings.

At least two generations of the same family are shown here.

Also, the film highlights a funny consequence of this in a scene where the bad guy tycoon Philippe Weis is at a fancy party with three young beautiful woman at his side, and Timberlake can’t tell at first glance how they’re related to him (Mother? Wife? Daughter? Granddaughter?), which complicates his strategy for approaching them. I actually don’t think this will be a problem in 2180 because humans will have cybernetic enhancements that will automatically scan and identify the people around them.

Eternal life might make people more risk-averse. When Timberlake goes to New Greenwich, he falls in love with Philippe Weis’ daughter, Sylvia. She’s a fusion of the classic Hollywood “forbidden fruit” and “rebellious princess” tropes, and waxes about her boredom with rich life and her uninformed belief that the poor get more out of life since they’re always on the verge of running out of time and dying. To show what a romantic badass he is, Timberlake dares her to go swimming in the ocean at night, which she initially refuses to do because she’s been conditioned to avoid dangerous activities. Medical immortality will indeed make people more risk-averse since they’ll have more to lose in a sense, but I doubt it will get so bad the people won’t want to do common things like swim in the ocean anymore.

By 2180, our bodies and the world around us will be infused with intelligent technology, which will go a long way towards mitigating risks to human life. An average human in that year will probably have cybernetic implants and wearable devices that continuously monitor their environment, calculate risk probabilities, and warn them of unsafe conditions or bad decisions they seem to be contemplating. There will also be robots everywhere that can rescue humans or render medical aid. This might get the point where every human has to be followed around by a helper robot and/or can have their actions canceled out by remote signals sent to their cybernetic implants (think of a technological nanny state where the government can make you instantly pass out if you start acting stupid). Given all the safeguards that will be in place, humans might be able to take more “risks” each day than you might think.

By 2180, humans might also make periodic “backups” of their minds using some kind of brain scanning technology. AIs will definitely back themselves up constantly, along with taking other measures to protect their lives, like distributing their consciousness among many different servers in different locations, which each server heavily protected against physical attack and computer viruses. Even if one server were destroyed, a duplicate could be instantly created and added to the network using a backup of the destroyed server’s data. By the same token, if one of your brain cells dies, your remaining brain cells can quickly do some neural re-wiring to compensate, and your consciousness does not die.

People will be able to transfer things by holding hands. In the movie, people can trade time by holding hands. As one person’s time decreases, the other person’s increases by the same amount, and their forearm digital clocks rapidly change to reflect this. I think by 2180, it will be common for humans to have cybernetic implants, organs, and body parts, and those artificial systems  will allow people to transfer electricity, data, nanomachines, and maybe their thoughts and feelings through physical contact (just imagine all humans having the equivalent of a USB plug built into the palms of their hands). Wireless transmission of data and maybe even electricity will also be possible.

In a way, it might be possible to transfer “life” to a dying person in the future by holding their hand and transferring electricity to recharge their batteries, nanomachines to repair their tissue damage, or data to fix some malfunction in their computer implants.

There will still be poor people and human factory workers. Absolutely not. The poorest person in 2180 will have a much better life in most ways than the richest person today, mostly thanks to better technology. Wealth and income disparities could still exist, and purely biological humans will probably find themselves in the lowest socioeconomic stratum, but poverty as we know it will be a distant memory. Factories will also be completely automated.