Graham Fraser Technology reporter BBC This fictional 2025 couple, along with the man’s ‘VR headset’, featured in the Tomorrow’s World episode in 1995. In 1995, the BBC’s Tomorrow’s World programme decided to predict what the world would look like 30 years later, in 2025. The show, which is no longer broadcast, featured one of the most famous scientists of the age, Prof Stephen Hawking, who predicted: “By 2025 we can expect big changes.” The programme team agreed, suggesting a raft of world-shaking innovations from hologram surgery to space junk gel. So, with the help of some experts – and the benefit of three decades of hindsight – let’s take a look at how much of today’s world that Tomorrow’s World successfully anticipated. The ‘Cyberspace Riots’ of 2005 The programme predicted there would be riots after financial markets “succumb to viral terrorism”. In 1995, the world wide web was really taking off – a development Tomorrow’s World thought would bring future trouble. They predicted “business barons” and banks would take control of the internet by 2000, establishing a “supernet” which they restricted access to. That, in turn, would prompt hacks, viruses and even riots. Tomorrow’s World in 1995 predicted riots would happen after the creation of the “supernet” Verdict – The internet has remained – mostly – open, and there have been no riots but there is little doubt the actions of hackers have caused misery for many people. One thing the programme didn’t predict was the role of the nation state hackers like North Korea, expertly told in the BBC’s Lazarus Heist podcast. Cybersecurity is hugely important for governments and companies, and people who are suspicious of banks have championed cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin. Asteroid mining and space junk gel Tomorrow’s World predicted the rise of asteroid mining, and the death of an astronaut from space junk The programme speculated space mining would become a lucrative industry, with companies excavating asteroids near Earth for precious metals. The show also suggested space junk would become such a problem it would not be safe for astronauts. The answer – a gigantic foam gel to slow down debris. Verdict – Well, there is no super foam gel and the problem of space junk is an acute one. There is also no space mining industry – but that could change. Futurist Tom Cheesewright is an optimist about mining beyond our planet. “The potential riches are unfathomable and the technology is entirely within our grasp,” he said. The super surgeons and their robots Tomorrow’s World thought patients would be operated on by robots that were remotely operated by a surgeon from a far-off location Tomorrow’s World predicted by 2004, a law would be passed for all UK hospitals to publish a league table of surgeon success rates. The top surgeons would become so popular, and so well paid, it would make no sense for them to travel to patients. Instead, patient holograms would be sent to them and the surgeon would operate using “spacial gloves”. At the patient’s end, a robot would perfectly mimic the movements of the surgeon. Verdict – They didn’t get it exactly right but robots are helping with surgeries. A smart speaker with a floating head Alexa? Siri? Google? Not quite. The programme featured a man of the future (wearing a fetching VR headset), his wife and a young girl in what appears to be modern-day London. In one section, the floating head of a woman comes out of a “smart speaker” to tell the man it has been a year since his holiday to “Indo Disney.” She encourages him to take another holiday via a “shuttle to Bangalore” – which would only take 40 minutes. Verdict – Ultra-fast travel feels as far away as ever, but holograms, smart speakers and VR headsets are becoming ever more prevalent. Banking using a microchip in your arm How do you feel about withdrawing some money using a chip implanted in your arm? Elsewhere in the programme, we were given a vision of the future of banking. It featured a woman going to a bank, complaining there were no humans, and then withdrawing 100 “Euro marks.” The bank gives her the money after scanning a chip in her arm. Verdict – Banking has indeed become more and more automated. And though paying via microchips inside the human body is a reality, other technologies – mainly fingerprint and face scanning – are much more widely used. In 1995, Tomorrow’s World offered a vision of self-driving cars and the failure of electric vehicles by 2025 Memories from the presenters Getty Images Monty Don is a familiar face to many who enjoy gardening programmes Gardeners’ World star Monty Don was one of the presenters on that Tomorrow’s World programme 30 years ago. His segment predicted a huge restoration of British woodlands thanks to genetic engineering and multi-storey agri facilities, leading to the return of animals including the brown bear. Reflecting on it now, he told BBC News that his part of the programme was “utopian” and “naive”. Looking towards the next 30 years, he is pleased the current generation of young people are “much more sensitive to climate change” and thinks people will be growing more of their own food by 2055. He added: “Tomorrow’s World was by definition geared towards the way that mankind could change and improve the world, whereas what we have really learnt since then is that mankind has a habit of making things worse, particularly environmentally, and we have to work with nature rather than try modify and control it.” Monty Don talking about the reintroduction of brown bears in the 1995 programme. Vivienne Parry was another presenter on the prediction show, and fronted a section about medicine. She fondly remembers filming it – and the rather limited visual effects of the day. “I had to stay absolutely still. I had a set of glasses on with a little camera attached. They were stuck on my face via a big blob of

Getty Images A US court has rejected the Biden administration’s bid to restore “net neutrality” rules, finding that the federal government does not have the authority to regulate internet providers like utilities. It marks a major defeat for so-called open internet advocates, who have long fought for protections that would require internet providers such as AT&T to treat all legal content equally. Such rules were first introduced by the Federal Communications Commission under former Democratic president Barack Obama but later repealed during Republican Donald Trump’s first term. The decision, just as Trump is poised to enter the White House for a second term, likely puts an end to the long-running legal battle over the issue. In their decision, the judges noted that different administrations have gone back and forth on the issue. But they said the court no longer had to give “deference” to the FCC’s reading of the law, pointing to a recent Supreme Court decision that limits the authority of federal agencies to interpret laws, a decision that critics expect will be used to weaken regulation in the years ahead. “Applying Loper Bright, means we can end the FCC’s vacillations,” the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals said. Brendan Carr, a Republican member of the FCC who Trump has tapped to lead the agency, said he was pleased the court had invalidated the Biden administration’s “Internet power grab”. The FCC’s outgoing Democratic commissioner said the ruling turned the issue over to Congress. “Consumers across the country have told us again and again that they want an internet that is fast, open, and fair,” Jessica Rosenworcel said. “With this decision it is clear that Congress now needs to heed their call, take up the charge for net neutrality, and put open internet principles in federal law.” The fight over net neutrality was once a heated issue in the US, pitting internet providers against big tech companies such as Google and Netflix. Comedian John Oliver famously urged his audience to express support for the rules, leading to a deluge of comments that crashed the government’s site. But the issue has faded in prominence since the rules were repealed in 2018. Thursday’s ruling does not affect state-level net neutrality laws, which in some places offer similar protections. But advocates, like Mr Oliver, have said that national rules are important to preventing internet providers from having powers to throttle certain content or charge more for speedy delivery of their service. Public Knowledge, a progressive-leaning internet policy group, said the decision had weakened the FCC’s power to shape privacy protections, implement public safety measures and take other action. It said it believed the court had erred in ruling that internet service providers were simply offering an “information service” rather than acting as telecommunications companies. “The court has created a dangerous regulatory gap that leaves consumers vulnerable and gives broadband providers unchecked power over Americans’ internet access,” it said. But USTelecom, an industry group whose members include AT&T and Verizon, said the decision was “a victory for American consumers that will lead to more investment, innovation, and competition in the dynamic digital marketplace.” Source link