>The thing is, you and I are no more qualified to speculate on the future than someone from 100 years ago would be qualified to speculate on the Internet.

I'd say we are.

We don't expect the speed of light to change for example. Whereas people in the 1800s didn't have any such hard limit (e.g. based on Newtonian theory).

We also have the benefit of hindsight, and can see the rate of technical development (and e.g. that the low hanging fruit were on the late 19th century, increasing on early 20th century, and dropping down after the later half of the 20th century.

>However I can say one thing: if we even make a fraction of the progress in the next 100 years compared to the progress in the last, I don’t think we have anything to worry about when it comes to energy or transportation.

Compared to the progress in the last 100 years, or the last 50 years? Because already the progress in the last 50 years is laughable compared to the progress up until 1970 or so.

E.g. we had electricity, nuclear energy, combustion engine, radio, tv, film, digital imaging, lasers, microwaves, satellites, internet, computers, airplanes, transistors, rockets, radars, and tons of other fundamentals already available by 1960s -- not so much huge progress later on aside from evolutionary stuff.

(Well, we did have the slinky)

> not so much huge progress later on aside from evolutionary stuff.

shouldn't the internet be considered the greatest achievement yet?

The internet is not a technology unto itself. Rather, it's an application of technology. The internet of today is vastly different from the internet of the 1960s (which GP included in their list), but it's not fundamentally different at a technological level. The change of the internet from ARPANET to today is driven by nothing more than incremental improvement in existing technologies.

When was the last time a new technology reached commercial success?

that's a weak argument imo. all technologies can be considered applications of other technologies, from steel making to space faring.

Well, even if "all technologies can be considered applications of other technologies" some are less so than others.

Besides we're not talking about mere products here, but core technologies, e.g. inventions. The steam engine, the combustion engine, electricity, the telephone, laser, microwave, satellites, and so on, weren't mere "applications of other technologies" and even less so a mere incremental bump in the way modern internet vs 60s/70s internet is.

We already had the internet invented in the 60s (ARPANET). And even a better conception of the www idea (Xanadu). The rest is evolutionary stuff -- and we haven't done better since, just spread the technology to everybody.