The specific methods have long been lost. Today, we can only rely on existing resources and archaeological remains to speculate and hypothesize — especially considering the immense difficulty of such work before the Iron Age. Each stage of megalith construction involves different processes. Here, I propose bold guesses.

Possible Quarrying Methods

If megaliths were to be used, the first step was extraction. For small quantities, stones might be gathered from natural deposits, but for large-scale use, deliberate quarrying was inevitable. Without iron tools, how was this achieved?

Stone hammer method: In the earliest period, workers might have struck the surface of a large stone with smaller stone hammers, chiseling small holes. These holes could be filled with pebbles or other materials — perhaps even nuts, if the original intent was food preparation. Heavy stones could then be dropped repeatedly to fracture the rock. Over time, this would split the block into smaller, transportable pieces. This method would leave little to no archaeological trace.

Thermal expansion and contraction: Imagine a group of prehistoric people cooking over the same rock surface for days, heating it until thermal stress caused cracks. This could free a large block ready for transport — again, leaving no obvious tool marks.

In modern times, quarrying uses sledgehammers, wedges, and chisels with great efficiency. But in the prehistoric context, these methods are much harder to reconstruct.

Challenges in Cutting and Shaping

Once quarried, the stone faced another challenge: precise cutting. How could massive blocks be cut in long, straight lines? Consider, for example, an ancient Egyptian sarcophagus block found with a crooked cut — perhaps abandoned as a failed attempt.

In the Bronze Age (pre-Iron Age), possible tools included:

• Straight wooden beams as guides, though they could warp with time and cause cuts to go astray.

• Bronze saws with abrasive sand added between blade and stone.

• Rope saws made from hemp soaked in resin and sand.

Power could come from wind, water, or human labor — perhaps even teams of enslaved workers.

Alternatives to sawing included stone-on-stone grinding and chipping, which could shape basic forms without leaving distinct tool marks, though this would be slower.

After the Iron Age, stoneworking became more efficient and better-documented. But pre-Iron Age craftsmanship remains an essential — if enigmatic — part of human history.

Theories of Transportation

Transporting megaliths without leaving traces remains another mystery. Possible methods include:

• Log rollers across flat ground.

• Ice sleds over frozen terrain.

• Levers and wooden cranes.

Specialists in mechanical engineering might offer more possibilities, but for now, let’s move on.

Secrets of Megalithic Fitting

Once transported, the stones had to be fitted together — often without mortar — in ways that modern buildings do not attempt. Here, the difference lies in material, measurement, and the reliance on human touch rather than automated precision.

A master mason who worked with stone for decades could sense its qualities beyond modern capability — judging fit by sound, texture, and even weather effects. Tools might have been simple: hammers, straightedges, measuring rods, water-filled levels. But the calibration was primarily tactile.

Training the Craftsmen

How were such master craftsmen trained? In a way, this parallels how modern engineers are educated — but with a much narrower specialization. Skills required included:

• Spatial reasoning

• Memory

• Geometric intuition

• Visual modeling ability

• Long-term focus with minimal emotional disturbance

• Consistent product quality

In today’s terms, such profiles could match individuals with unique cognitive structures — perhaps those with exceptional pattern recognition, similar to savants or elite puzzle champions. Such talent is rare, meaning an organized system was needed to identify and cultivate it.

Training might have involved spiritual discipline, religious ritual, strict social systems, and possibly psychoactive substances. Psychedelics like mushrooms or certain plants can heighten sensitivity to patterns and geometry, as modern neuroscience has shown. Over years or decades, this training would produce the unmatched precision of ancient megalithic joins — a perfection we cannot replicate today.

What has been lost is not just technique, but also the oral-tactile traditions, the synchronization with natural rhythms of material, and the “collective subconscious” of teams who worked in unison for generations.

Rare Cases: Stone Melting and Mirror Polishing

Some accounts suggest that certain pyramid stones appear melted. One hypothesis: in ritual, sunlight could have been concentrated via mirrors onto a small target, intense enough to burn through offerings — and perhaps heat stone to the point of surface fusion.

Mirror-smooth stone surfaces might have been achieved with nothing more than sand, straw, leather, and patient abrasion — leaving no obvious tool marks.

More Than Just Lost Techniques

Studying lost civilizations is not just about “advanced technology.” It is about understanding early human thought — the “why,” “how,” and “what” of possible solutions under extreme conditions.

These people had no phones, no computers, no iron tools, no theory of relativity. Disease and death were daily realities. Yet they carved poetry into stone, transcending their age.

Today, there are no megalithic masons — but the spirit of craftsmanship lives on in master machinists, chefs, and animal breeders who notice the smallest details in their work.

And a note of caution: do not romanticize the idea of “traveling back in time with modern knowledge.” Without fitting into their worldview, you might not be seen as a god — but rather end up on the pyre.

Western strategies: openness and conservatismIn much of Europe and North America, the majority lean toward sexual openness. Typically, relationships start with mutual attraction — people date freely, first drawn by physical appeal, then deepening intimacy through satisfying sexual compatibility, followed by day-to-day emotional connection. This follows a natural pattern of instinct leading to attachment. Once a couple has been together for many years, the chances of breaking up or divorcing drop significantly.

Marriage, however, is often viewed as a contractual arrangement, with the legal and financial implications making it cumbersome. As a result, many couples remain in long-term partnerships without registering their marriage. The rate of legal marriage is far higher than in Asia, but still, in many cases, people marry only when there’s a tangible benefit — for example, military personnel or civil servants might receive subsidies when they marry and have children, easing financial pressures. For ordinary people, marriage certificates bring few advantages and, in the event of separation, can involve costly property division — a strong disincentive.

A smaller portion of the Western population remains sexually conservative. This is largely due to two groups: those with strong religious faith, and men whose personal attractiveness — in terms of looks, social skills, and emotional intelligence — is low. The first group follows traditional religious customs, values ceremonial honor, and maintains sexual caution to avoid complex relationships or sexually transmitted diseases, staying true to personal beliefs. The second group consists of men with low attraction value, controlling tendencies, but a willingness to provide materially — essentially seeing marriage as a transaction. While rare in the West (far more common in Asia), such men may seek partners from Asia or turn to sex work. For example, marrying a woman from Vietnam with financial support can be seen as a practical arrangement.

Asian patterns: different dynamicsAsia’s approach to sexual openness differs significantly from Europe’s.

In Japan, sexual openness is often transactional — the sex industry is highly developed, with a wide range of services available for purchase. Given the country’s socially restrictive culture — with rigid etiquette, hierarchy, and indirect communication — attraction based purely on personal charm is rare compared to the West.

In other parts of Asia, sexual openness is split between the upper and lower classes.

• Lower-class openness often comes from those outside strict Confucian norms, such as “yellow-hair” types — young men who dye their hair, dress flamboyantly, and modify their vehicles. They attract partners through emotional intensity and physical chemistry, but long-term commitments often run into economic barriers like dowries, abortions, or breakups over financial instability.

• Upper-class openness is practiced by wealthy men or those with both assets and desire for such a lifestyle — keeping multiple partners in a “harem” arrangement. Whether this counts as “openness” is debatable: it fits a practical benefit-driven model but doesn’t necessarily align with moral ideals or natural emotional bonding.

Due to the region’s dominant conservative cultural backdrop, men who successfully adopt a Western-style charm-based approach are rare, often concentrated in major cities. Technology advances quickly, but social attitudes lag behind.

Note: Money can buy a body without a soul, and poverty can drive someone to leave — wealth cannot purchase an interesting mind.

Conservative men in Asia often treat marriage as a literal purchase: paying a dowry, buying property, and securing a wife without investing in emotional attraction. This approach is widespread, and even when marriage happens, incompatibility often follows — with frequent media reports of suicides over relationship conflicts, paternity scandals, or voluntary property loss during divorce.

Religious states: enforced conservatismIn theocratic societies, restrictions are harsher — polygamy is common, women are required to wear head coverings, and “temporary marriages” exist as a release valve in extremely conservative areas. Modern secular societies tend to keep their distance from such practices.

On individual choiceUltimately, openness or conservatism is a personal balance — if it doesn’t feel wrong internally, it’s fine. If someone’s attractiveness doesn’t meet your standards, you can reject them; if you find someone pleasing and easy to be with, you can accept them. Preferences vary — physical appearance, interaction quality, intelligence, credentials, artistic taste, conversational style, and charisma all contribute to attraction. Following one’s own inclinations is not about morality, but about weighing economic, cultural, and personal factors.

Those who can’t decide — wanting “anyone just to settle” but also rejecting anyone who doesn’t match their ideal, or yearning for sex but refusing to seek professional services — remain in a state of indecisive frustration.

Here, I will outline the social impacts under each choice. Historical data—once researched, summarized, and organized—can form the backbone of a complete article. In broad strokes: prehistoric society and early civilizations were open; the Middle Ages to the modern era saw repression; today, the world is reopening, yet some regions remain conservative, resulting in torn and contradictory attitudes.

1. Prehistoric Society: Instinctive Freedom In prehistoric times, human instincts were unrestrained by feudal moral codes. Sexual freedom fueled population growth, increased labor output, boosted resource production, and improved the tribe’s collective survival capability. Since “collectivism” as an ideological consensus had not yet formed, there was no practical reason to suppress sexuality—doing so would only hand over survival advantages to other human groups. In simple terms: the goal was rapid population growth (“mass troops”), construction, material accumulation, and resilience against nature. Repression at this stage would have led to extinction by the natural environment, leaving no “later history.” Thus, chastity codes, morality doctrines, property rights, family names—anything obstructing survival and growth—were absent. The ruling decision here was to live and resist nature.

2. Early Civilizations: Cultural Flourishing under Openness Early civilizations saw the accumulation of surplus resources, enabling construction, sculpture, painting, writing, poetry, music, philosophy, science, and legal codes. While war existed, sexuality was not a primary target of control. These societies still required population growth, and centralized feudal authority had yet to fully take shape. The real threats were external; internally, expansion through reproduction was the priority. Civilizations that reached a certain surplus inevitably turned to war and territorial expansion. Ancient Greek nude sculptures are famous examples—but behind this cultural brilliance were wars and slavery. Even so, ordinary people’s sexuality remained relatively open. The ruling decision here was to develop, build, and expand.

3. Japan: A Case without Strong Historical Repression Japan’s history shows no strong, systematic sexual repression. As a resource-poor nation, choosing sexual conservatism would have meant a direct risk of being wiped out by nature. The Emperor often lacked real political power, while regional warlords were locked in cycles of expansion and defense. Expansion required population; repressing sexuality would have undermined the ability to “mass troops.” This helps explain the persistence of openness, and how Japan’s sex industry developed: as cities grew, samurai, artisans, and merchants increased, creating gender imbalances that fueled demand for sexual services. Unreleased desires can drive people to madness. Thus, Japan’s ruling decision was no repression, leading to a modern sex industry that thrives, even as “normal relationships” have narrowed.

4. Feudal Era: Moral Power as Control In the feudal era, political and religious authorities (imperial power, the Church) sought to consolidate stability. With moral discourse in hand, they began to frame sexuality in terms of morality and social order—a latent repression. Physical control over every individual was impractical, so “soft power” shaped public thought before “hard power” enforced it. Beneficiaries were middle- and upper-class men, who gained more stable sexual access. Losers were the majority of women and lower-class men—women lost their freedom to choose partners; lower-class men lost almost all sexual opportunities.

Examples:

East Asia: women caught in adultery drowned in “pig cages.”

Europe: enforced chastity belts.

Middle East: strict dress codes prohibiting female exposure.

Marriage, as soft power, restricted women while presenting itself as moral order. Extreme controls included physical confinement, foot binding, and palace harems. The ruling choice here was conservatism, useful for stability but relaxed when population growth was needed.

1. Renaissance: Cracks in Conservatism The Renaissance broke the Church’s ideological monopoly. The Black Death acted as a catalyst, killing one-third of Europe’s population. Believers began questioning the Church’s inability to save them: If God is merciful, why is He unmoved by human suffering? If God enjoys human suffering, why continue to worship? This philosophical and theological challenge weakened religious authority, prompting the rise of humanism. Marriage shifted from property ownership toward a rational cooperative contract. Societies untouched by the plague progressed more slowly. Here, rulers could no longer fully enforce conservatism—public values had shifted under the shock of mass death.

2. Industrial Revolution to Modern Wars: Acceleration of Change With religion weakened, monarchies consolidated power, leading into the Industrial Revolution. Small wars and revolutions alone didn’t drastically change sexual attitudes—but World War I and II did. Tens of millions of deaths forced people to reflect: Is the “nation,” “collective,” or “dogma” worth dying for? The White Feather Movement further pushed public opinion.

Renaissance = first acceleration of openness.

World Wars = second acceleration.

In 1948, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights marked a turning point. Europe institutionalized sexual education, legalized red-light districts, promoted contraception, and advanced gender equality. Sex shifted from “private shame” to “personal health and rights.” At this point, rulers could no longer fully dictate sexual norms.

1. Conservatism in the Modern Age: A Political Tool In culturally conservative regions, sexual morality is still used to:

Divert attention from crises.

Legitimize ruling authority.

“Clean up vice” to build a moral image.

By stigmatizing sex, leaders control not just physical behavior but also thought, autonomy, and independence. Suppression fosters obedience and stability, creating a controllable collective.

1. Conclusion: How Long Can Conservatism Last? In the information age, sexual conservatism faces unprecedented challenges. Yet, crises can prompt temporary reversals—openness is not irreversible.

Ruler’s Choice – Cost/Benefit Table

Choice Advantages Disadvantages

Openness Population boom, labor expansion, external expansion potential

                                                       Diverse ideologies, harder social control 

Conservatism Stable order, resources concentrated in upper classes

Limited population growth, long-term economic stagnation, accumulated ideological conflict

Below, I outline five distinct periods and regional phenomena that illustrate this transformation.

1. The Tribal Era In early tribal societies, social structures were loose, featuring practices such as group living, trial marriages, and “walking marriages” in which partners did not cohabitate. Matrilineal descent prevailed, without established patriarchal systems or moral restrictions on sex. The concept of “sexual morality” had not yet formed, and the sex trade had not emerged.

Examples:

The Mosuo (China): Walking marriages, no formal marriage but long-term partnerships, matrilineal authority.

Trobriand Islands (South Pacific): Free courtship and sexual openness.

Amazonian tribes: Sex as a collective activity.

Matrilineal society did not necessarily mean female rule—rather, kinship was defined through the mother’s line, and sex was not yet tied to inheritance laws.

1. The Age of Ancient Civilizations Under slave-based economies, sexual expression was open, and the sex industry became legal and institutionalized.

Examples:

Ancient Greece and Rome: Within the context of class inequality and slavery, people pursued pleasure freely. Prostitution operated openly, serving mainly the upper classes, with no moral condemnation. Aristocratic male-male relationships were celebrated, while common brothels catered to the lower classes.

Ancient Egypt and Babylon: Similar conditions, with no significant moral opposition.

China (Wei, Jin, Southern and Northern Dynasties to Tang): A relatively relaxed attitude toward sexuality, with no systematic repression.

Here, the legitimacy of sex work derived from the rigid social hierarchy—it was part of the class system, not a moral battleground.

1. The Middle Ages This period marked the rise of moral regulation over sexuality.

Christian Europe: The Church established sexual morality, declaring sex outside marriage sinful. Sexuality was linked to the concept of original sin, and moral authority rested with the clergy. The Inquisition and witch hunts often sexualized accusations, turning desire into a symbol of evil.

Islamic societies: Gender segregation, modest dress codes, and strict marriage laws were enforced. Yet, temporary marriage (mut‘ah) existed as a sanctioned outlet in some regions—a pragmatic concession to human nature.

China (Song, Yuan, Ming, Qing): Confucian orthodoxy dominated, merging with Daoist moralism to promote “preserving heavenly principles and extinguishing human desires.” Women were bound by chastity, the “three obediences,” and the “four virtues.” Prostitutes were placed in a low social caste, subject to legal and moral stigma.

1. Renaissance to the Modern Era Sex work became institutionalized and, in some places, regulated by law.

Europe: Legalized prostitution appeared alongside regulation—Britain’s Contagious Diseases Acts, France’s red-light district system. In colonial territories such as British India, military brothels served soldiers until well into the 20th century.

Art & Literature: The sex industry intersected with high culture. Many artists and elites frequented sex workers, and sexually transmitted diseases were common among cultural figures.

Enlightenment & Liberalism: Extreme repression began to fade, the seeds of human rights were planted, and sexual rights slowly entered public discourse.

1. The Contemporary World Today, global attitudes toward sex and the sex trade are polarized.

In some regions, sex work is legalized, recognized as part of human rights, and integrated into public health frameworks.

In others, it remains criminalized, with moral narratives framing men as disposable tools and women as ideologically liberated—producing deep social and gender tensions.

Europe: Generally open toward sex but cautious about marriage—a reversal of many Asian societies, where marriage is embraced but sexual behavior is conservative.

Japan’s Case: Traditionally, Japan’s sexual culture was not repressive; some Shinto festivals had explicit sexual elements. During the Edo period, sex work was fully institutionalized and, compared to other Confucian cultures, more socially integrated. In the modern era, commercial sex remains widespread, but the surrounding culture projects an air of restraint—a dissonance between practice and public image.

Conclusion: Across history, sexual norms and the sex industry have mirrored the balance of power, economic stability, and cultural values of each era. While forms of control have varied—from religious dogma to legal regulation—the underlying tension between desire and social order has never disappeared. Today, whether in the form of legalization, suppression, or silent tolerance, the conversation around sex inevitably touches on questions of human rights, bodily autonomy, and the limits of authority.

The longest punishments in legal systems are life imprisonment or fixed-term sentences of over a hundred years (capital punishment excluded here). Meanwhile, the longest financial loans—mortgages and student loans—rarely exceed thirty years. Some are just a few months. Why aren't they longer?

The duration of imprisonment, whether life or centuries long, is imposed without meaningful resistance from the convicted. Whether such punishment is truly "reasonable" matters less than its function: to isolate and restriction. But if that's reasonable, why isn't a 100-year mortgage?

The Efficiency Paradox of Life Sentences and Centuries-long Terms

Suppose life imprisonment is justified. What if the convict lives for 10,000 years? Living off public funds—would that still be a “criminal” or a kind of government-funded worker? Maybe more like a highly controlled corporate slave. Maybe he digs mines all day like a humanoid robot. Maybe he does clerical work in silence, fed on crumbs. Either way, the crime becomes irrelevant—the person is now unpaid labor in a cage.

In an ideal setting, he's a golden canary: safe, fed, untouched by outside storms. In reality, he’s a shackled beast of burden—soaked by every drop of rain, working endlessly. Old whips have become batons, the beatings rebranded. His labor is rewarded at one-tenth the market rate. Who cares? Labor in, profit out. A few cigarettes behind bars become his last shred of dignity.

Now suppose a two-century sentence is handed down. But the convict dies after two years—suicide. How effective was that punishment? 1%? That’s not justice; it’s a cosmic joke. What should the judge do? Resume the punishment post-mortem?

Let’s say I were the judge:Let the body rot in the cell, count roll-call daily. No response? Baton strike. Eventually, bones become dust. But then, is this punishment for the dead—or a ritual for the living?

Call in a priest. Condemn the soul to hell for 200 years. But the convict appears in a dream and declares he’s an atheist. The hell sentence? Invalid. Then what? Go to heaven for vacation?

As the judge, I chase him to heaven. But heaven’s gatekeeper says:

“You can’t enter. You killed yourself.”

“But he’s here!”

“He’s not part of any faith. He’s not evil enough for hell. He’s free to roam.”

The judge wakes up… utterly lost.

Why Loans Can't Last 100 Years: Financial Cowardice?

Loans today max out at 30 years. Why not more? If punishments can exceed lifespans, why not loans? A 300-year mortgage would be genius. Start at 30, die at 60, the next generation picks up the debt. Don’t want to? Too bad—inheritance works both ways.

Even better—extend loans beyond death. After all, many religions claim souls live on. Why can’t debts follow them? Burn some hell money to repay the interest.

The Absurd Logic of Housing: Shelter or Shackles?

Today’s mortgage: 30 years for a concrete shelter.In the Stone Age? A man could build ten homes in five years using just his hands. Makes you wonder who was truly free.

A modern laborer spends five years’ wages—after subtracting living costs—just to afford a basic 40-square-meter home with a toilet and kitchen. That’s the bare minimum. (Hong Kong’s coffin apartments or Indian tin slums don’t count.)

The quality? A home that takes 30 years to repay should last 300 years. Does it? Often not.

Can it be passed down for generations? Rarely.

Can it be rented out for good ROI? Not really.

Conclusion: Most modern housing debt is toxic asset theater.

Cultural sites built thousands of years ago still stand. Your modern home? “Illegal structure.” Bulldozers roll in. Dust, debris, maybe your pet gets beaten to death in the chaos. Civilization?

Is a 30-Year Student Loan Worth the Degree?

Now comes the education trap: a 30-year student loan. Is it reasonable? Depends.

• **Was the subject self-learnable?**If yes, why pay? History, literature, philosophy—these can be learned through open courses and forums. Why borrow tens of thousands for a degree that shouldn’t be gatekept?

• **Was the subject hands-on?**For medicine, engineering, or law—yes, in-person training and equipment matter. But then, **how long should it take to pay back?**Ideally: five years’ salary should do. Beyond that, it becomes a life sentence with no bars.

  Blue-collar Wisdom vs. White-collar Debt Slavery

  A white-collar graduate, crushed under a 30-year loan, lives worse than a high school dropout with a steady blue-collar job.

• No excessive spending. No bad habits. Keeps one phone for five years. Wakes up to sunlight and sips tea in peace.

  He doesn’t need a philosophy degree to understand life.Meanwhile, the office worker proclaims:

  "I suffer now so I can one day be free!"But the homeless man reading in the public library might just be freer than both.

• Why not let people repay student loans with their pension after retirement? Die owing debt? So what?The bank can charge 1000% interest, across generations. Profits eternal. Who says finance lacks imagination?

  Conclusion: The Contract for "Permitted Survival"

  Modern humans can receive punishments that outlast their lives.Yet they can’t borrow money beyond 30 years.One is imposed, the other is denied.One implies guilt, the other assumes value.But both are systems of control.

• So the question becomes:

  Are we truly choosing freedom—or just signing a pre-approved contract for “permitted survival”?

Let me use two screws to represent this phenomenon.

The First Screw: Burned Out, Cast Aside

The first screw works in a technical field — perhaps a senior maintenance technician at a five-star hotel. A respectable blue-collar job. You've been doing this for ten years, day in and day out. Whether you're hands-on or giving technical instructions, you've fully adapted to your environment.

Then, one day, you're suddenly laid off.

Why? Maybe you're getting older, your physical condition is declining, you've suffered an injury or illness. Maybe your salary is considered too high. Maybe the hotel or company went bankrupt overnight. You're a screw that's been ground down. Your body is wrecked with occupational illnesses — skin conditions, cuts, burns, joint inflammation, endocrine problems from years of oil and dust exposure. Your face is swollen and cratered, like a meteorite-scarred surface. This grand machine you've served no longer has shelter or space for a screw like you.

And now the machine itself is facing dismantling and sale. You — the screw — have no power to change that. You're unemployed. What now?

You’re not yet retired. You still have a mortgage, kids to raise, family responsibilities, and another twenty years to get through. You've got nowhere left to retreat. You chose this life — the dowry, the loans for a house and car, small business ventures, investments. Maybe you even made money for a while. But when the market turns unstable, it doesn’t matter if you lose ten thousand or a million — until you're in debt. Then you're swallowed, drop by drop, by the abyss.("If you owe millions, it becomes meaningless; but if you owe hundreds of thousands, that’s when the abyss opens.")

The Second Screw: Passive, Yet Intact

The other screw just does repetitive manual labor — maybe with a little bit of skill or managerial task here and there. Bolting screws in a factory, carrying bricks, logistics, kitchen work. Maybe you only work a few months a year, spending the rest of the time drifting, traveling, staying detached from the system.

Technicians and managers might look down on you, but at the end of the day, you’re still a screw. One day, you're laid off too — but more simply: your job's been replaced by automation or AI.

Here's the silver lining: Compared to the burned-out first screw, you're still healthy. You eat decently, sleep regularly, don't smoke or drink excessively. You still look presentable (meaning: at least a potential partner wouldn’t be totally repelled).

You're used to being unemployed anyway. As mass layoffs come, you just shrug. The machine you once served is being dismantled? So what? You'll just cut spending, lower expectations, go fishing, drink tea, enjoy life. Maybe even learn some new skills. Eat on time. Sleep on time. As for gaming and staying up late — you know better than to make that your lifestyle.

Did the First Screw Do Anything Wrong?

Not at all. Loyal to the job, followed society's timeline, earned every cent with honest labor. A drink now and then, a few cigarettes — just minor comforts. Never hurt anyone. So why was he suddenly thrown out? And why with so much additional burden?

Where is the way out?

Let’s ask: Why did this happen when he did nothing wrong? Why fall into this financial swamp? Why struggle like livestock just to survive? Why are there dowries, housing loans, car payments, game microtransactions, alcohol and tobacco consumption?

Would you die without them?

(You’d die without food, water, or sleep — but not without these. Even sex is optional.)

What about society's timeline for your life? If you don’t finish each "life milestone" on schedule, are you a failure?

Who made these rules?

In video games, there are developers, designers, community managers. If a game sucks, you can at least complain to someone. But in this game called life, the real world? There’s no developer to shout at. You’re unhappy — but there’s no one to report the bugs to.

Final Thought

As screws, our individual size and strength are limited. But at the very least, we can still choose — do we maintain ourselves, or do we burn ourselves out for a machine that won’t even remember our names?

(As for the bosses, those big enough not to starve… well, that’s a discussion for another chapter.)

1. Device Integration: Smartphone, Tablet, Laptop—All in One? We're witnessing an increasing integration of devices. The convergence of smartphones, tablets, and laptops is advancing—from chip unification to system-level and application-level convergence. Apple, with its ecosystem and control over both hardware and software, is best positioned to lead this evolution.

Imagine a 15-inch iPad-like device that combines the power of a computer and the communication abilities of a phone. It supports drawing with fingers like a stylus, typing on an external keyboard, running code, messaging, all seamlessly. If portability isn't essential, the need for a separate smartphone could be eliminated. For those who need portability, smartwatches and AR glasses might take over some functions. Perhaps air projection or VR interaction will become more viable alternatives.

2. Will Small-Form Smartphones Disappear? Not at All. Small-sized phones still have immense value. Smartphone imaging technology has nearly hit its ceiling. The compact digital camera is mostly gone, and while smartphones still struggle to replace mirrorless cameras, there's still room for breakthroughs.

Once the standalone camera market becomes small enough, high-end imaging technology—like large CMOS sensors—could trickle down into phones. Combine that with external lens modules, and smartphone photography could leap forward again.

As for the race toward ultra-thin phones? It's mostly a marketing gimmick. The true future of "thinness" is invisibility—not shaving a few millimeters off the body. Users don’t truly care about thickness. They care about reliability, battery life, and overall performance. A slightly thicker phone might mean a much larger battery—and many users would gladly trade thinness for endurance.

3. Specialized Smartphones: HIFI, Recording, and Niche Devices Beyond cameras and batteries, specialized features like HiFi audio, professional recording, and other niche needs are emerging. So far, HiFi phones are mostly just marketing hype—still far from delivering truly professional-grade results. But there’s potential.

The future depends on how far human needs evolve and whether manufacturers are willing to serve niche user bases. Unfortunately, highly customizable phone makers often go bankrupt or pivot quickly. Serving a small group well isn’t yet a sustainable business model—but it could be, someday.

4. When Smartphone Chips Rival High-End GPUs Let’s imagine this: smartphone chips continue to improve, with smaller manufacturing processes (beyond nanometers), lower power consumption, and less heat. When mobile chips reach the power of something like an RTX 5090, while maintaining reasonable thermal profiles, we might see public places like libraries or malls offering interactive terminals: large screens with gesture and touch controls, ready to connect to your phone.

Your smartphone becomes the computing core; the environment supplies the peripherals.

5. Battery Replacement, Wireless Charging, and Apple’s Bold Choices Since Apple removed user-replaceable batteries, there’s been backlash. But let’s think deeper—do most consumers really need to swap batteries? There are alternatives: wireless charging pads, power banks (even if bulky), and official repair services for battery replacements. The real concern is safety and technical reliability, not the ability to pop in a new cell on the fly.

Apple's choice wasn’t purely a limitation—it was a trade-off. Whether users accept that trade depends on the alternatives available and how well they're integrated into daily life.

6. eSIM, Carrier Locking, and the Invisible Chains of the Market On the system side, eSIM technology is rolling out—a potential benefit for users. But what about carrier-locked phones, especially in markets like the US?

In the long run, if communication tech evolves to a point where carrier fees vanish—or are drastically reduced—it could truly benefit consumers. However, until then, locked devices create friction. They can't be completely unusable (or they'd be worthless), but they’re limited enough to trap users. Tech companies walk a tightrope between control and usability.

And what happens when smartphones connect directly to satellite networks? That might force closed systems and restrictive regimes to confront the unstoppable force of global communication.

7. Storage, Power, and The End of the Gray Market When Apple finally offers massive storage at reasonable prices, the demand for unofficial expansion or gray-market modifications may fade. Consumers get peace of mind, and Apple gets a better reputation—without losing revenue.

Historically, high-tech devices were for the wealthy. Now, tech serves the masses. But tiers still exist—expensive vs. affordable models. In the post-consumerism era, perhaps these tiers will shrink. Hardware may become equal, but permissions won't.

8. Same Device, Different function In the end, even if everyone holds the same model of iPhone, their usage rights differ vastly. A president and a civilian might both own an iPhone—but only one of them can use it to authorize missile strikes.

Technology may democratize access to devices, but not necessarily to power. The question isn’t just what you hold in your hand—it’s what it can actually do for you.

Over the past half-century, computers have undergone tremendous transformation: from bulky CRT monitors to sleek displays, from pixelated visuals to 4K clarity. As prices continue to fall and performance keeps rising, it’s reasonable to ask: how much further can we go?

We’re seeing the ongoing evolution—storage capacities keep expanding, display resolutions reach 8K and possibly 16K, and 3D video and VR devices are emerging (though not yet affordable or mature). In time, these will likely become widespread, delivering even more immersive tech experiences.

But there’s a key reality in everyday life: excess performance isn't always useful. Audiophiles chase Hi-Fi equipment and even DIY custom setups, while casual users can't tell the difference. The same goes for computers. A cutting-edge GPU like the RTX 5090 is overkill for most people who just browse or chat online. How many consumers truly need this level of power? Perhaps less than 5%.

Once the high-end market becomes too niche, manufacturing such advanced components may no longer be profitable. We may see production slowing down or stopping altogether. The marginal value of top-tier consumer GPUs hits a ceiling. For specialized users, renting online GPUs or cloud servers will be more practical. This rental model could grow into a mainstream market.

Parallel computing will evolve—not with home setups like the now-obsolete "SLI" (multi-GPU setup), but through server-side collaborative processing. However, some local offline hardware will remain irreplaceable. New hardware release cycles may slow: instead of every 2 years, we may see cycles of 4–5 years. Consumers will become more willing to compromise on graphics quality or frame rate, and production users will adopt only as needed.

There’s also a floor to how cheap devices can get. When even the cheapest computers meet most needs, and software stops aggressively consuming new performance gains, users will feel satisfied. That satisfaction might just be watching 4K/8K videos at 100Hz vs 200Hz—experientially not that different. AAA game titles will lose their "holy" status; high-definition visuals will become standard. This could realistically happen within the next 20 years.

The Trend Toward Miniaturization and Modular Design

Miniaturization could become a dominant design trend. Large motherboards are increasingly unnecessary for most users. Smaller boards that support essential tasks, combined with modular expansion (think Apple’s Mac Mini + external docks), could reshape hardware philosophy.

Current docks don’t support professional-grade GPU or PCIe cards, but the idea will influence design. Shrinking dimensions, optimizing internal layout, and eliminating unnecessary bulk becomes a worthwhile goal.

Imagine a Mac Mini with no fans—just a sleek body that plugs in and works. For high performance, you attach a magnetic external water-cooling system (like Apple’s MagSafe): magnetic detection triggers the system to cool down. Want to overclock? Add ice cubes to the coolant for a few hours of boosted performance. Even large artistic heatsinks can be snapped on, like decorative sculptures.

By outsourcing traditional internal cooling, we eliminate the "dust-sucking" fan issue that plagues desktops. External modules provide expandability. Even GPUs, often seen as huge, aren't that large—their slots and cooling dictate size. If slot orientation becomes flexible, if chips (CPU, GPU, etc.) align with the outer casing, we could see ultra-compact, thermally efficient setups.

This approach challenges the current paradigm. It’s a design for a future where hardware becomes quiet, clean, externalized—and smart.