Free Machine

To make it to their ideal future, they'll have to work together.

Presented with automation or climate-change related predicaments, participants debate and then vote between two policy options. The winning option is enacted, we jump forward in time, and based on their choices, face a new situation.

At the end of a twenty-year period, the group's decisions have guided Tomorrowland to one of four potential futures.

Future Perfect engaged the public in an imaginative and fun environment where they could learn about the complexity of tech & environment policy, with the goal of driving participants to become advocates for these type of policies in their local jurisdictions.

Format

Live, group game

Setting

Tomorrowland — an imagined society

Duration

20-year simulation in ~90 minutes

Outcomes

One of four possible futures

Focus

Automation & climate policy

In the game

Future Perfect game slide — participants weigh AI policy options in 2018

A real predicament from the game: the year is 2018, and Tomorrowland must decide how to regulate A.I.

The four possible futures: Eden, Rentism, Socialism, Elysium

The four futures participants could reach — mapped across axes of abundance, scarcity, equality, and hierarchy.

How it worked

From now to twenty years from today

Year 0

Join Tomorrowland

Participants took on the role of neighborhood council members. They were introduced to the society, its values, and the challenges it faces.

Year +5

First predicament

Automation and climate trends intensified. The group debated and voted between two divergent policy paths. The majority won; consequences followed.

Year +10

Ripple effects

Earlier decisions shaped the landscape. New predicaments emerged. Coalition-building became necessary to navigate harder choices.

Year +15

The stakes rose

The costs and benefits of earlier policies were now visible. One vote could reshape the trajectory of an entire society.

Year +20

One of four futures

The group's cumulative decisions guided Tomorrowland to one of four possible outcomes — from equitable abundance to deep inequality. The debrief began.