Well, why not? Also, I'll do it in whatever order I please, not chronological order. Just because.
2090 to 2099
- What's with this graph??? Why does train speed mysteriously increase exponentially, instead of a more sensible linear increase or an even more sensible S-curve? Vehicle speed is one of those things where Moore's Law doesn't make sense. Look at speed records for cars and airplanes, if you don't believe me.
- As I pointed out in my PM, world fertility rates probably aren't going to level off by 2095. The chances of that happening are maybe somewhere in the neighborhood of 20% according to the latest research. And that's without life extension.
- Not a criticism, but a thought I've been entertaining for a while: given the proliferation of real-time machine translation, are we sure that languages will continue to disappear? I mean, even if kids only speak those "obscure local dialects", they'll be able to talk to English speakers or people speaking other obscure local dialects just fine. So there's much less of an incentive to abandon native languages like that. Though I suppose it's possible that some tribal languages could disappear, but still....
- "These people will tend to be those who reject science and technology, or have purposefully chosen to isolate themselves from the rest of the world." -- no, they really won't. Just no. Also, religion is going to be a small but significant part of our culture for centuries and millennia to come. Science can never explain Creation, tell us the meaning of life, or do anything else that religions were created for. It's up to everyone to figure out what these things mean to them, and for some people religion is a great way to do that.
2100 to 2149
- "A person can learn self-defence, for example, become an expert in any sport, or be taught to operate a new vehicle, all within a matter of seconds." -- I can see it being a great help, but you would still have to build up the right muscles, which takes time.
- "Compared to transhumans, these non-upgraded humans are becoming like cavemen – thousands of years behind in intellectual development" -- YMMV but I think 2100 is probably too soon for this. Sure, by then people without neural laces (which actually aren't too invasive, they just require a simple injection) will be at a distinct disadvantage, but it'll be on the level of not having a college degree, not being a caveman. Einstein with no lace beats a lazy idiot with one. And more powerful, more invasive procedures are likely to be shunned by most--human nature. Also, cavemen weren't stupid, just ignorant. A Cro-Magnon or even Neanderthal with a proper education and immersion in 21st century culture would probably do okay.
- "landing pads for anti-grav vehicles" -- er, what? How do they work? Does whatever powers the anti-gravity drive really take up less energy than the engines on a plane? Anti-gravity may exist by then, but it's likely to be limited to specialized applications for a long, long time.
- "ultradense but extremely lightweight structures" -- density is literally mass divided by volume, so this doesn't make a lot of sense. On the other hand, AB matter is a possibility.
- "Ongoing globalisation, the birth of a single world currency, the dominance of artificial intelligence in government, a defection of citizens to online "virtual states", and other technological advances have contributed to this." -- Okay, so I've never really understood how you can defect to a "virtual state". I mean, you are physically in some country (unless you're in international waters or in space), so wouldn't you still have to pay taxes and obey their laws?
- "The sheer complexity of the brain, and its inherent fragility – along with the many legislative barriers that stood in the way – meant that it was nearly a century before such technology reached the mainstream." -- while you're right that it's likely to take a long time for legal, ethical, and philosophical issues to be ironed out, this doesn't happen here. Instead it's inexplicably immediately accepted.
- "Religious and conservative groups voiced their objections to what they saw as a fundamental violation of God's will." -- come on, what's with all the religion-hate here. Almost every atheist I've met online isn't content to simply not believe in God, instead they must force their views on everyone! This...this doesn't even happen that often. Like, human cloning isn't banned because of some BS about God's will, it's banned because it kills babies. Another example: I really don't like the anti-nuclear movement, but they sure as hell aren't religiously motivated. Also, many of the greatest scientists and inventors in history and even today believe in a god. And it's not like there aren't actual reasons why people--even far-lefties and atheists--might object to mind uploading. Nobody's scared of, I dunno, fucking dying during the process? Nobody's thinking about issues of identity and what happens if a bunch of "someone-elses" are wandering around society? Anything? Nah, let's just hate on religious people.
- "With each passing year, society is becoming increasingly fractured, with an ever-widening divide between those who seek to enhance themselves, and those who prefer to eschew such technology." -- except in any realistic projection of the future, it would be a continuum, not a stark black-and-white divide.