I've read your comment, and a follow-on comment to someone else, and I think understand now.
You're saying that the future will be cool, but your disagreement with him is more in the definition of the word cool than with his point. When he says cool, he means what you're calling weird. This is all semantics, more or less. (Right?)
Another point you make is that Taleb misses the important fact that in the future (hopefully) a far greater number of people will get to enjoy these pleasures. I think this is important, and the biggest weakness with the article. Taleb seems to argue from the perspective that either a) there's no substantive cultural or societal difference between the West and East or b), the West will continue to be dominant. But in reality, the future may look radically different from today, not because of technology, but because a different (and much larger, of course) group of people will be using and furthering the technology.
You're saying that the future will be cool, but your disagreement with him is more in the definition of the word cool than with his point. When he says cool, he means what you're calling weird. This is all semantics, more or less. (Right?)
Another point you make is that Taleb misses the important fact that in the future (hopefully) a far greater number of people will get to enjoy these pleasures. I think this is important, and the biggest weakness with the article. Taleb seems to argue from the perspective that either a) there's no substantive cultural or societal difference between the West and East or b), the West will continue to be dominant. But in reality, the future may look radically different from today, not because of technology, but because a different (and much larger, of course) group of people will be using and furthering the technology.
I addressed your 3rd point in another comment.