Ask HN: Why do futurists skip the near future?
All their arguments live in the farthest distances of time frames. So far, that they really may as well be science fiction. It seems quite odd to me, as a technologist, that they seem allergic to shorter term time horizons. I'm guessing it is some kind of mental anguish avoidance? For instance, if you know your'e going to die within 100 years, and all this amazing world changing tech is going to happen in 150 years, then you can just let your brain soak in all the cool and fun 150 year ideas, and skip the part where you die 50 years before they happen. Feels good, and you can think you're making progress somehow.
Maybe its just more exciting and fun to think about, like science fiction. Perhaps its pseudoprogress. It could be like procrastination, where instead of doing that thing you're supposed to, you learn more, or watch something educational. It seems like progress, but is it? I guess its better than video games. Shifting your focus onto opportunities that occur only after shorter term problems are solved, at the cost of those short term problems is a bad deal.
Fix todays problems today, and tomorrows problems tomorrow. Obviously for non serialized problems, the parallel approach is good, however in the case of futurists they appear to focus on the dreams and not so much the doing? 10 million members in /r/futurology. Post about how hard a thing is and watch the downvotes roll in. There's nothing wrong with hard things, only if you never get to actually work on them, because you were too focused on the problems of the future, to focus on the problems at hand.