Re: Backwards or forwards?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think you guys are all nuts. I'd travel back maybe 15 years tops and be one of the wealthiest guys on the planet by today. I wouldn't want to be "the" wealthiest.

I'd also try to save millions of lives if possible (although people would probably think I'm loony).

I think many of you are underestimating just how valuable it would be to go back even 2 years.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nuts? Only if money was the lead driver. I was thinking more in terms of interesting and useful. Agree if money was the driver a short time would safe and easy.

greedy b.. , luckyme

[/ QUOTE ]

Money AND security.... I would think it very risky to just pop into existence 3000 years from now. I wouldn't be at all confident there'd even be a planet left.

Going too far back doesn't appeal to me either for reasons already stated. So I guess if you're a big risk taker, the future would be better. I just don't have alot of confidence in the future.

Re: Backwards or forwards?
 

3000 forward. I suspect 75 years from now is not going to be pleasant at the start of the post-oil-based economy. 75 years ago, nah I needs my inter-pipes. 1000 BC sucked, goes without saying.

Re: Backwards or forwards?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think you guys are all nuts. I'd travel back maybe 15 years tops and be one of the wealthiest guys on the planet by today. I wouldn't want to be "the" wealthiest.

I'd also try to save millions of lives if possible (although people would probably think I'm loony).

I think many of you are underestimating just how valuable it would be to go back even 2 years.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nuts? Only if money was the lead driver. I was thinking more in terms of interesting and useful. Agree if money was the driver a short time would safe and easy.

greedy b.. , luckyme

[/ QUOTE ]

Money AND security.... I would think it very risky to just pop into existence 3000 years from now. I wouldn't be at all confident there'd even be a planet left.

Going too far back doesn't appeal to me either for reasons already stated. So I guess if you're a big risk taker, the future would be better. I just don't have alot of confidence in the future.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, 3000 years in the future is definitely the high-variance play. Going a couple years into the past, you could pretty much predict exactly how the rest of your life was going to play out. You'd be rich and famous and dangerous, and there would be pretty big risks associated with that, but nothing compared to going 3000 years into the future. But think of the benefits! I think I could get more joy and fulfillment out of a week in 5007 than a lifetime in 1932.

I suppose I also assign a fairly high probability to there being human life on Earth in 3,000 years, and a slightly lower but still fairly high probability to it being more advanced that at present.

Re: Backwards or forwards?
 

<font color="blue">I suppose I also assign a fairly high probability to there being human life on Earth in 3,000 years, and a slightly lower but still fairly high probability to it being more advanced that at present.

</font>

You've got more confidence in humanity than I do vhawk. Not only would I bet mankind is extinct in 3000 years, I'd be willing lay odds on it.

Another problem, is you'd be a complete idiot in the year 5008. Not only that, but there's no telling what social settings you'd find, or how people would react to you. Just think of how someone from 3000 years in our past would fit into our current society? The poor guy would never make it. Yeah, the more I think about it, I definitely wouldn't go too far into the future. I think it would be very risky indeed.

Re: Backwards or forwards?
 

[ QUOTE ]
<font color="blue">I suppose I also assign a fairly high probability to there being human life on Earth in 3,000 years, and a slightly lower but still fairly high probability to it being more advanced that at present.

</font>

You've got more confidence in humanity than I do vhawk. Not only would I bet mankind is extinct in 3000 years, I'd be willing lay odds on it.

Another problem, is you'd be a complete idiot in the year 5008. Not only that, but there's no telling what social settings you'd find, or how people would react to you. Just think of how someone from 3000 years in our past would fit into our current society? The poor guy would never make it. Yeah, the more I think about it, I definitely wouldn't go too far into the future. I think it would be very risky indeed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Me being a complete idiot in 5007 is pretty much exactly the reason I'd be interested in going there. Thats why I do pretty much everything I do, make myself the smallest fish in the biggest pond and try to get bigger. I'd be bored stiff as the smartest man in 1000 BC, I'm certain of it.

Re: Backwards or forwards?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="blue">I suppose I also assign a fairly high probability to there being human life on Earth in 3,000 years, and a slightly lower but still fairly high probability to it being more advanced that at present.

</font>

You've got more confidence in humanity than I do vhawk. Not only would I bet mankind is extinct in 3000 years, I'd be willing lay odds on it.

Another problem, is you'd be a complete idiot in the year 5008. Not only that, but there's no telling what social settings you'd find, or how people would react to you. Just think of how someone from 3000 years in our past would fit into our current society? The poor guy would never make it. Yeah, the more I think about it, I definitely wouldn't go too far into the future. I think it would be very risky indeed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Me being a complete idiot in 5007 is pretty much exactly the reason I'd be interested in going there. Thats why I do pretty much everything I do, make myself the smallest fish in the biggest pond and try to get bigger. I'd be bored stiff as the smartest man in 1000 BC, I'm certain of it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? I think it might be kinda fun. And I might be arguing with godboy right now about how unlikely it is that vhawk was really god.

Re: Backwards or forwards?
 

Would not go.

Re: Backwards or forwards?
 

Really tough choice. I'm torn between going forward 100 or so years (fairly safe, somewhat familiar) and the full 3000. I think curiosity would take me forward 3000 years. It's be frightening but I'd find knowing the future irresistible.

I'd go to a remote part of the US, just in case it wasn't safe, taking ample supplies. From there I could scope out civilization or its ruins (assuming the world isn't covered in microscopic cameras or grey ooze or radioactivity or life sensing technology by then).

Re: Backwards or forwards?
 

Backwards thirty years. Make a fortune.

Re: Backwards or forwards?
 

only one post I think mentioned risk reward ratio (variance i thinkn it was put).

you have to consider that if you go forward far enough, you may be able to live practically forever. immortality or close to it.