Survey of US population on their view of the future of tech is... interesting

[colonel_mortis]

Source: http://www.theverge.com/2014/4/17/5624008/fear-the-future-love-the-future-pew-american-technology-attitudes-survey
 
It's a long article, but here are some of the key bits:

[...]
A majority of Americans, albeit not a huge one, believe that technological change will lead to a future where our lives are mostly better. 59 percent of the 1,001 adults interviewed by landline and cellphone agreed with that statement, while 30 percent believed that future would be "mostly worse." And we largely believe that at least a few major advances are coming in the next 50 years. 81 percent believed that we would be able to grow custom organs in a lab for transplants; 22 percent thought that it would "definitely happen" and 60 percent thought it would "probably happen." 51 percent thought that computers would become "as effective as people" at creating music, movies, novels, and paintings. The standard, dry Pew report tone sounds downright judgmental when talking about the limits of our faith: researchers say that "just" one in five Americans think we'll control the weather by 2064. In all fairness, though, it is slightly surprising that we're much more likely to expect teleportation (39 percent) and long term off-planet colonies (33 percent).
Despite our categorical optimism about "technology," it turns out that we're sometimes more conservative about things that are actually on the horizon. 63 percent of Americans, for example, think that it would be a change for the worse if US airspace was opened to "personal and commercial drones." 22 percent thought it would be a change for the better. 65 percent don't like the idea of having robots care for the elderly and infirm, while 28 percent thought it would be a change for the better. 66 percent think that it would be a bad thing if parents could alter a child's DNA "to produce smarter, healthier, or more athletic offspring," compared to 26 percent in support. The most popular advance was a world where "most people wear implants or other devices that constantly show them information about the world around them," which 53 percent thought would be a change for the worse and 37 percent thought would be an improvement.
[...]
This survey, though, also found mixed responses to less controversial technology that's being prototyped or planned today. Only 20 percent of Americans would eat meat grown in a lab, with 78 percent saying they'd refuse; very few didn't know. 26 percent would install a brain implant to improve "memory and mental capacity," with 72 percent declining — apparently we'd rather have something embedded in our brain's delicate flesh than eat synthetic food. Driverless cars, a technology much closer to fruition, was almost an even split: 48 percent would do it, and 50 percent wouldn't. Some technological advances are only supported in hindsight: response to the Apollo program during the 1960s, for example, was downright tepid according to polls of the time. Nonetheless, most people apparently aren't eagerly awaiting the fruits of Google X.
Almost all of the survey's responses were set by Pew. But one final question simply asked the thing that people have been debating for decades: what "futuristic invention" would you most like to own? The responses were encouragingly varied. Plenty of Americans picked better transportation options, including the ever-popular personal spacecraft and jetpack. A tiny percentage picked "world peace" and "stop wars," which this reporter concludes could count as futuristic inventions. A disappointing amount either didn't know (28 percent) or had no interest in future tech (11 percent). The most popular single answers (not categories), though, were time travel and increased health and longevity. A lot of us, it turns out, just want to be around for the next big thing.

The demographic split:

 
I am surprised at how pessimistic the public is about many of the new technologies:

• Drones are apparently really unpopular, despite the fact that as well as being "fun", they also have a lot of commercial potential (Amazon Prime Drones)
• Robots to look after the elderly are inevitable because of the ageing population needing more carers
• Why people are against lab-grown food is another thing that puzzles me... it is better for the environment, less cruel, safer and potentially in the future it could also be cheaper. What is there not to like?

On the other hand, a fair few people seemed for driverless cars, and while I agree that they are awesome (and the future), I had assumed that they were actually fairly unpopular. Apparently not

[JLCitadel]

You make no sense

 

Easily 60-70% based on this are optimistic about the future. Only poor people, idiots, or pessimists aren't.

[colonel_mortis]

You make no sense

Sorry It's late. I'll try to fix that.

EDIT: done

[ManOfDisguise]

interesting indeed hmm. 

[GeTecknics]

surprising that 30% dont like tech

[JLCitadel]

surprising that 30% dont like tech

 

Well the majority of people questioned are below a certain income level. If you'll notice the more money people made the more they believed it would be good or optimistic. Especially with the oldest and youngest group, because they've witnessed the most amazing things. The evolving change over time, while people in their middle ages are generally less happy, then younger/older people.

[One Who Craves Souls]

Why people are against lab-grown food is another thing that puzzles me... it is better for the environment, less cruel, safer and potentially in the future it could also be cheaper. What is there not to like?

We are eating chemically infested food at fast foods, frozen microwavable goodies and even our salads are chemically processed vegetables. Some people are simply ignorant, they hear the words "lab-grown food" and assume it's worse than what we're eating today.

[wpirobotbuilder]

People with less disposable income are far less likely to see the benefit of this increase in technology. Someone who can afford the latest tech will more likely be in touch with the goings-on and be excited about it.

 

College graduates have likely been exposed to more technology than high school graduates and are also more closely linked to cutting-edge research, especially science/engineering students.

 

This study shows that people who can afford technology or work more closely with it are more excited about the future.

[ACatWithThumbs]

I'm pretty confident that we will be able to cure cancer in this century with the advances in tech.
How can you not be optimistic about tech?

In 2-3 years I'll play with my Oculus rift on my brand new Pascal GPU   

And why should I fear drones? (Like an F-22 or nukes are less a threat)

 

[Phillyphries]

We are eating chemically infested food at fast foods, frozen microwavable goodies and even our salads are chemically processed vegetables. Some people are simply ignorant, they hear the words "lab-grown food" and assume it's worse than what we're eating today.

 

I wonder why people believe that organic foods are supposedly better for you than commercially grown food.. It might not be 100% natural, but at least it feeds waaaaaay more people and doesn't emit as much greenhouse gasses. If people are still healthy eating that stuff, then who cares in my opinion.

 

Of course what I'm talking about isn't really about fast foods and stuff though, that stuff is nasty.

 

Anyways, as long as the better technology starts rolling into places such as public schools, then I could of course see how big and better of an impact technology could have in life.

[Murdoch]

We are eating chemically infested food at fast foods, frozen microwavable goodies and even our salads are chemically processed vegetables. Some people are simply ignorant, they hear the words "lab-grown food" and assume it's worse than what we're eating today.

 

I think you're right that people hear 'lab grown' and are put off by that. But maybe people are just suspicious of the motives, the last thing that was sold to the US public was GM Crops. And look how that turned out. You'd have to be truly ignorant to think a company like Monsanto is beneficial to the food chain.

[tharvey]

I think that its a marketing problem.  The bad things about tech get all the attention while all of the good tends to go unnoticed.  People need to be more educated about technology.

  “There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.”   - Isaac Asimov

[Phillyphries]

 

I think that its a marketing problem.  The bad things about tech get all the attention while all of the good tends to go unnoticed.  People need to be more educated about technology.

  “There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.”   - Isaac Asimov

 

 

True. But I think there is also something to consider about parts of America, where lots of the Midwest and some Southern parts are pretty simple, and don't really put that much stock into technology.

[mr moose]

I wonder if that 30% are just pessimistic or if they work in government agencies or large companies like monsato. 

 

Pessimism isn't always the result of a deficit view of reality, sometimes it is the result of repeated observation of negative activities in response to environmental changes.

[IdeaStormer]

Yeay! Another poll no one you know participated in, sounds legit as me making it up based on what I read in the news. B)

[tharvey]

True. But I think there is also something to consider about parts of America, where lots of the Midwest and some Southern parts are pretty simple, and don't really put that much stock into technology.

 

Good point.  I live in Texas so I have to put up with a lot of that.

[Maskot]

You make no sense

 

Easily 60-70% based on this are optimistic about the future. Only poor people, idiots, or pessimists aren't.

and women, which fall into 2 of those categories and since the husband is the bread winner, she's not worried about being poor.  (joke, don't over react)

[One Who Craves Souls]

I think you're right that people hear 'lab grown' and are put off by that. But maybe people are just suspicious of the motives, the last thing that was sold to the US public was GM Crops. And look how that turned out. You'd have to be truly ignorant to think a company like Monsanto is beneficial to the food chain.

Yes, Monsanto was my motivation to not trust mass produced "organic" products, that's why I said chemically produced vegetables. However my point was more of an observation of mine, where people dislike "lab grown" products yet without knowing they're already eating it.

[Curemylife]

Hell I'm not even sure it will all be better, not that tech will ruin the world but how laws will be made around them and how we as humans will lean on it more, more production more waste and bam, we will have a mix of Terminator, The Matrix, Wall-E and Elysium.

 

And still define "better", seriously, Wall-E just came out as a roadmap. We're all fucked and so is this planet. 

[Murdoch]

Yes, Monsanto was my motivation to not trust mass produced "organic" products, that's why I said chemically produced vegetables. However my point was more of an observation of mine, where people dislike "lab grown" products yet without knowing they're already eating it.

 

Yeah, I think you're completely correct that people dislike the unknown, or even fear it. Especially if it has a perception problem like 'lab grown', those words conjure up a certain image in a person's mind. Nonetheless, even though people are suspicious for the wrong reasons, I think given how GM crops have been utilised, we should be suspicious of how lab grown food would be used. I get the impression it would be used to mass produce vast quantities of the 'lowest passable standard' grade mono-products at the cheapest possible cost, which would be used to feed the masses. The PR campaign would of course say it's better for the environment, less cruel, safer, and provides more nutrition. Given the way the food industry works in the US, that wouldn't be the reality. A continued cycle of obesity and diabetes would be far more likely.

 

I'm all for advancement in technology. But we really need to keep the fuckers that are misusing them in check.

[One Who Craves Souls]

Yeah, I think you're completely correct that people dislike the unknown, or even fear it. Especially if it has a perception problem like 'lab grown', those words conjure up a certain image in a person's mind. Nonetheless, even though people are suspicious for the wrong reasons, I think given how GM crops have been utilised, we should be suspicious of how lab grown food would be used. I get the impression it would be used to mass produce vast quantities of the 'lowest passable standard' grade mono-products at the cheapest possible cost, which would be used to feed the masses. The PR campaign would of course say it's better for the environment, less cruel, safer, and provides more nutrition. Given the way the food industry works in the US, that wouldn't be the reality. A continued cycle of obesity and diabetes would be far more likely.

 

I'm all for advancement in technology. But we really need to keep the fuckers that are misusing them in check.

I couldn't have say it better, and we are right to not trust them.

[StingBull]

%30 of the people know the robot Apocalypse is nigh. It's only a matter of time.

[Blade of Grass]

I wonder why people believe that organic foods are supposedly better for you than commercially grown food.. It might not be 100% natural, but at least it feeds waaaaaay more people and doesn't emit as much greenhouse gasses. If people are still healthy eating that stuff, then who cares in my opinion.

Confirm this for me, are you saying that organic food produces more greenhouse gasses?

[Admire]

You make no sense

 

Easily 60-70% based on this are optimistic about the future. Only poor people, idiots, or pessimists aren't.

 

There is nothing wrong with beings a pessimist....

People with less disposable income are far less likely to see the benefit of this increase in technology. Someone who can afford the latest tech will more likely be in touch with the goings-on and be excited about it.

 

College graduates have likely been exposed to more technology than high school graduates and are also more closely linked to cutting-edge research, especially science/engineering students.

 

This study shows that people who can afford technology or work more closely with it are more excited about the future.

 

I would consider myself to be in touch with the goings on, and I can be excited about tons of tech stuff. But that does not mean that tech will make me happier in the long run. There are a lot of pitfalls and the complete end of privacy will happen in my life time. That is something to be extremely worried about.

 

Tech is a very broad definition and while there are things that makes our lifes better, there are also things that really don't.