Back in 1970, Alvin Toffler wrote Future Shock, where he introduced the idea that too much rapid change could leave people feeling overwhelmed, stressed, and disconnected. He called it “future shock” — and honestly, reading it today feels almost eerie with how accurate he was.

Toffler believed we were moving from an industrial society to a “super-industrial” one, where everything would change faster than people could handle. The book was a huge hit at the time, selling over six million copies, but what’s crazy is how much of what he talked about feels even more true in 2025. Some examples:

  • Disposable culture: He predicted throwaway products, and now we have single-use plastics, fast fashion, and gadgets that feel obsolete within a year.

  • Tech burnout: Toffler said technology would become outdated faster and faster. Today, if you don’t upgrade your phone or update your software, you feel left behind.

  • Rent instead of own: Services like Airbnb and Uber fit his prediction that we’d move away from owning things and toward renting everything.

  • Job instability: He nailed the rise of the gig economy, freelancing, and how fast-changing industries make it hard to stay trained up and secure.

  • Transient relationships: He warned about shallow, fleeting social connections — something social media, dating apps, and global mobility have absolutely amplified.

  • Information overload: This term literally came from Future Shock, and if you’ve ever felt exhausted just from scrolling through your feeds or reading the news, you know exactly what he meant.

Toffler also talked about the “death of permanence” — not just products, but relationships, jobs, even identities becoming temporary and interchangeable. He warned it would cause “shattering stress and disorientation.” Looking around at the rising rates of anxiety, depression, and burnout today, it’s hard not to see what he meant.

I think about this book a lot when I read about some of the sick things happening today. Is this a warped perspective?

  • yarr@feddit.nlOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    21 hours ago

    Err, did you read your own link? This wasn’t a deliberate “watermark”. It was a training error that resulted in some odd characters being inserted. This was a training defect that was fixed, not some sort of plagarism countermeasure. These marks were present for only a short time and only on a subset of OpenAI models.