Advertise on podcast: Future Tense

Fans are spending thousands of dollars a month to support their favourite streamers on TikTok Live, but most of the money is going to TikTok itself.

Cambridge University has a new institute dedicated to understanding extraterrestrial languages. It's about being prepared for the possibility that intelligent life exists beyond our galaxy. Also, the dangers of being overly dramatic when talking about climate change; the link between indigenous language and health; and the researchers who say it's time for human being to wake up to the fact that it's not all about us.

Among the angst over the creative potential of Artificial Intelligence, some researchers and academics are now turning the spotlight back onto humans. If AI can be as imaginative as your average human being, they ask, what does that say about traditional notions of human creativity? Have we long overestimated our own smarts? It's also prompted a discussion about what "creativity" actually means and why the term only came into common usage during the second half of the last century.

Scientists are changing the genetics of cells so that they can be used for a whole range of purposes never before imagined. Think building a biocomputer with a processor powered by bacteria or re-engineering microbes to make environmentally-friendly concrete. The potential is enormous, but there are warnings from within the field, not to let the hype get ahead of reality.

There’s a growing public sense that the current model of the social contract is broken, due in large part to rising inequality and the pursuit of profit over social progress. The “social contract” defines the relationship between citizens, their government and business. Its modern form emerged after WWII and, in western democracies, was largely structured around the principles of the welfare state. It’s about equity, order and trust. So, does the essence of the social contract still have value? And if so, how can it make fit for purpose in the 21st century?

Many commentators bemoan the adolescent nature of modern society. Adults, they suggest, are acting like juveniles and thereby eroding our culture and destroying our politics. We hear two arguments to the contrary. Also,  philosopher  William MacAskill on his new book “What We Owe The Future”.

Our modern understanding of innovation isn't modern at all, it turns out. Historian, Iwan Rhys Morus, says we're being held back by Victorian-era notions of the future as a land to be conquered; and the lone-genius inventor as the standard bearer of technological advance. Which might explain why research productivity is now sharply declining, despite a substantial rise in research investment..

Exploring new ideas, new approaches, new technologies — the edge of change.

Are attitudes towards drinking changing as we learn more about the impact alcohol can have on our bodies? Drinking has been part of our social and cultural activities for centuries. But cultural norms appear to be shifting. So, could alcohol go the way of cigarettes and become socially unacceptable?

It might be an uncomfortable idea for many, but in the short term climate change will produce "winners" as well as losers. Some countries, companies, communities and species will actually benefit from a warming world. But in what ways and for how long?

Technology companies aren’t just stealing your intellectual property – your creative content - they’re making vast profits out of selling it back to you. AI-powered apps like ChatGPT are trained on vast amounts of stolen data. What’s worse, it’s all justified as a public good. They call it “efficient infringement”. So, why are they allowed to get away with it? And what can be done about it? Also, the Living Building Challenge – it’s about building better construction and healthier communities; and a call for greater focus on prevention in dealing with domestic violence.  

It's estimated that by 2050 more than 70 per cent of the world's population will live in cities. Urbanisation carries many benefits, but it also threatens to intensify the climate crisis. So, how do we better design our cities to minimise the "urban heat island" effect? The solutions are out there, but do we have the will to put them into practice?