I think the major thing Asimov misses in some of his writing is are the 2nd and 3rd order effects of technology. Not always - Solaria from <i>The Naked Sun</i> comes to mind as a society heavily distorted by their tech - but often. And this led him to not anticipate tech such as the Internet.<p>For example, early on he mentioned having predicted pocket-sized computers in the early 1950s - which is true (I don't remember whether it was an <i>Empire</i>, <i>Foundation</i> or <i>Robots</i> story). But the other stuff, and society around the pocket-sized computers remained unchanged. Pocket-sized computing didn't apparently make an impression on people other than scientists and engineers. The freer availability of information didn't change society's behavior in any way.<p>It's something that you often see in sci-fi - the authors don't foresee all the follow-on effects or possibilities of the things they introduce. I loved Star Wars as a kid, but now I can't help but wonder why they didn't have a Galactic Internet to transmit the stolen Death Star plans in Episode 4.
I was watching that while my wife overheard and commented on how funny he was.<p>Meanwhile UK TV prime time talk shows only have reality TV people, and film people (both times I avoided the word 'star' deliberately). Most of them are dull-as-a-door-mat, and so the show relies on the host saying outrageous things to them. There must be some people left in the world who are both funny and smart.
"I imagine that in 30 years, we'll have a situation in which there won't be any wars... either that, or there won't be any us." [11:38]<p>Edit: I should not try to incorporate basic math in dumb jokes about Mules called Osama when I first wake up in the morning, apparently. I am old enough to know better, I have no idea what happened there.<p>In all seriousness, there were at least a dozen other notable armed conflicts happening around 2010, so I think 30 years was simply a little too short of a timespan for world peace (although the average person's risk of dying violently did drop quite significantly during that time). He was likely thinking more about larger events-- particularly of course the use of nuclear weapons, which he strongly campaigned against. So far, so good there, but it's still way too early to draw conclusions.<p>A lot of solid foresight in general, though. The main thing that stands out to me is just how it's all taking a lot longer to play out than people were thinking it would in the early 80s.
I like his proposals for space development. Build up in orbit. Space stations, factories, power stations. Build bases and mines on the moon. Then go outwards.
My favorite part is Isaac's answer to David's observation that the technology is getting more and more complex to use:<p><a href="https://youtu.be/365kJOsFd3w?t=5m58s" rel="nofollow">https://youtu.be/365kJOsFd3w?t=5m58s</a>
The piano outro played in the last few seconds was the Close Encounters of the Third Kind note sequence[0].<p>[0] <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4PYI6TzqYk" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4PYI6TzqYk</a>
Youtube suggested also this interview of Asimov to me, and I really like it:<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSxMZBp-2Zs" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSxMZBp-2Zs</a>
Strange as this may sound, this reminds me of Joe Rogan's interview with Elon Musk:<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycPr5-27vSI" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycPr5-27vSI</a><p>Some of Asimov's predictions about the future were... off. The middle segment of Musk's interview with Rogan was about the future of AI and cybernetics. It will be very interesting to watch that interview in 40 years.