The Questions of (an) upper being(s) ignored:

My opinion + Arguments.

I don't think so. To believe the technological end ("end of the tech tree") is near is a fallacy which results from limited Knowledge. Nobody is able to see what will be invented in the future. 200 years ago nobody could have ever imagined something like a Computer.

For example something similar happened also in Physics. There was a time when physicists thought that they had found everything with Newton's laws and research would come to an end soon. Then Einstein came with his new theory and turned everything on its head.

You can never know if you have reached the end because we can only look back and only guess what's coming next. Our species has a history of more then 12.000 years and within that we have never really reached an end, despite many predicting it in the most different times. So why should we reach it now in the next 10 years?

Byter said:
200 years ago nobody could have ever imagined something like a Computer.

240 years old programmable robot:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_programming

All religious stuff are just human conceptions anyway. Humans are part of the biological evolution like any other species. And they have been at their strongest, healthiest, most intelligent, best fit at the end of the Paleolithic (~12,000 years ago).

There's a virus, it can kill. There are allways virusses that kill. This one pokes into a huge economical bubble that blew up over the past 15 years and now partly pops (but everything is being done atm to make the next one even bigger).

So, get the hitch hikers guide and a towel. Use the towel. And don't panic.

Story: Sailing between Sardinia and Corse (calm, boring, hot mediterranean summer conditions) we received a distress call from a nearby motorboat (one of these floating refridgerators with isolating comfort) yelling for help because they had run out of fuel, nautically by no means a reason for distress. They were counting all that didn't work, the air condition, the engine, the fridge, the autopilot … and so on. Our laughter floated from the cockpit over the calm seas, and when they had finally stopped somebody responded: “Shut up, Spaghetti, and die like a man !” (Sorry dear Italian colleagues, I love you all, but this really had happened).

:-)

NikiTo said:

Byter said:
200 years ago nobody could have ever imagined something like a Computer.

Points for you. I meant digital Computers (??), one of the earliest of those being Zuse Z3, Atanasoff-Berry-Computer, Colossus.

@Byter The idea is more revolutionary than the implementation. How you differentiate between the computer of Atanasov built from lamps and computers working with silicon? It is the same centuries old revolutionary idea. Just the implementation varies.

A concept/idea - “you should not divide by zero”,

The same concept/idea is valid in both mechanical and digital hardware -

@NikiTo Well you already differentiated between these two as you named a difference. lol

However that's actually a good Point you brought up.

But you understand my Point? You do not have the possibilities with Computers from 1000/500/200 years ago compared to the possibilities nowadays. And with the missing possibilities never had such “inventions” as for example electronical games/Video-games.

@Byter Yes i understood you the first time, but i wanted to show you there is more than the last century.

I think quantum computers could be something people could not imagine 200 years ago. It is not only about new hardware but a new concept too.

All of the rest is just about speeding up the implementation of the same old concept.

(Depends of the game. I guess, somebody could play a ping-pong game on a huge mechanical computer. )

(i have to admit too that the concept of programming evolved with time. Just as the hardware evolved. But it is the same thing evolved and optimized. Quantum computers are a revolution in all of the aspects. Although, it is still more of a concept than a practical useful implementation)

@NikiTo I mostly agree with you now but I am not going to ask any more because it is not relevant to the original topic.

But thanks. I have never thought About it this way