Talk:Future-proof

Errr... definition?
This article doesn't make sense if one doesn't already know what "Future proof" means. Someone please change it to describe what it actually means, especially in the introductory section of the article? Thanks! --dionyziz (talk) 00:54, 11 December 2007 (UTC).

This article is spot on, relevant, and clarified a term I had seen in usage but didn't understand exactly what it meant. -- tomwsulcer May 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomwsulcer (talk • contribs) 18:38, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Can you spot the irony?
"For example, if a person had stored a video that is important to them on a Betamax tape years ago, they could have trouble finding a player for it today (2009)." LOLZY ---69.68.247.7 (talk) 17:59, 22 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm glad this was removed from the article; choosing VHS over Betamax in the late 1970s is not an example of future proofing. Future proofing describes anticipating future innovations and preventing obsolescence, not actually predicting which competing technology might win.  A future-proof solution to recordings in that era would have been to record to both formats so that whichever prevails would be preserved.  Of course, nothing is fully future proof.  The Betamax recording would have become useless in the late 1980s and the VHS recording has become useless in the mid 2000s (thus the above comment on irony).  Staying within the same genre (and skipping the DVD generation), the same comparison can be made with the more recent HD DVD and Blu-ray, the most prudent (future proof) action would be to either use both, or, since players of both could also play DVDs, to have stuck with DVD until one of those formats won over the other (which happened in 2008).
 * Even these aren't the best examples of future proofing. When I think of future proofing, I think of technologies like HTML, whose specifications clearly state that unknown elements should be silently ignored, which allows newer versions of the HTML standard to define new elements without breaking browsers' ability to deal with them. Adam KatzΔ☎  00:17, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Even these aren't the best examples of future proofing. When I think of future proofing, I think of technologies like HTML, whose specifications clearly state that unknown elements should be silently ignored, which allows newer versions of the HTML standard to define new elements without breaking browsers' ability to deal with them. Adam KatzΔ☎  00:17, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Digital Preservation
Someone suggested a merge with DigitalPreservation, but they left no comments for discussion, so I hid the proposal. I don't think the two things are the same at all. I prefer it the way it is. _Something_ should be on a page called FutureProof and yes the link to DigitalPreservation should be there as it is now. --DuLithgow 20:42, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Such as
using a non-propiertry, free, open file format!

Nothing can be made totally future proof - like fools the future is too ingenious. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.151.63.76 (talk) 16:45, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

AEC Disambiguation
This page was identified as including a disambiguation error based on the term "AEC".

In order to resolve this problem I have removed the wikilink from the term as I am unable to determine, from the context, what the term is referring to. If you wish to restore the link please ensure that the term and the link are fully resolved. Perry Middlemiss (talk) 11:30, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Too verbose?
Back in 2013, this article went from being brief and concise (and flagged as needing citations) to a major article (+22,595 characters, including 20 citations) due to the work of one contributor who has only ever touched this one page (the edits since then have been mostly related to formatting and minor content tweaks here and there). I think this was an over-correction. This is now far too large an article for such a simple term. Furthermore, I worry about the difficulty to verify the offline citations from an unproven user (though that is not nearly enough grounds to remove them!). Adam KatzΔ☎  23:24, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Uncited material in need of citations
I am moving the following uncited material here until it can be properly supported with inline citations of reliable, secondary sources, per WP:V, WP:CS, WP:IRS, WP:PSTS, WP:BLP, WP:NOR, et al. This diff shows where it was in the article. Nightscream (talk) 18:54, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Concept
This term is commonly found in electronics, data storage, and communications systems. It is also found in industrial design, computers, software, health care/medical, strategic sustainable development, strategic management consultancy and product design.

Study of the principles behind "future-proofing" both within the architecture, engineering and construction (AEC) industry and among outside industries can give vital information about the basis of future-proofing. This information can be distilled into several Principles which can be applied to a variety of areas.

Industrial design
Industrial design teaches that future-proof products are timeless, have high durability, and develop ongoing aesthetic and emotional attraction.

Climate change and energy conservation
The term "future-proofing" in relation to sustainable design began to be used in 2007. It has been used more often in sustainable design in relation to energy conservation to minimize the effects of future global temperature rise and/or rising energy costs. By far, the most common use of the term "future-proofing" is found in relation to sustainable design and energy conservation in particular. In this context, the term is usually referring to the ability of a structure to withstand impacts from future shortages in energy and resources, increasing world population, and environmental issues, by reducing the amount of energy consumption in the building. Understanding the use of "future-proofing" in this field assists in development of the concept of future-proofing as applied to existing structures.

Architecture, engineering and construction
Obsolescence is an important characteristic of future-proofing a property because it emphasizes the need for the property to continue to be viable. Though not explicitly stated, the shocks and stresses to a property in the future are one potential way in which a property may become not future-proof. It is also important to note that each form of obsolescence can be either curable or incurable. The separation of curable and incurable obsolescence is ill-defined because the amount of effort one is willing to put into correcting it varies depending on several factors: people, time, budget, availability, etc.

The principles of a resilient built environment include:


 * Local materials, parts and labor
 * Low energy input
 * High capacity for future flexibility and adaptability of use
 * High durability and redundancy of building systems
 * Environmentally responsive design
 * Sensitivity and responsiveness to changes in constituent parts and environment
 * High level of diversity in component systems and features

Options and diversity are strategies similar to ecological resilience discussed above. This approach again points out the importance of flexibility, adaptability, and diversity to future-proofing urban environments.

Historic buildings
The design of interventions in existing buildings which are not detrimental to the future of the building may be called "future-proofing." Future-proofing includes the careful consideration of how “sustainable” alterations to historic structures affect the original historic material of the structure. This effect is significant for long service life structures in order to prevent them from deteriorating and being demolished. This effect is especially significant in designated structures where the intent is to do no harm to the historic fabric of the structure.

Historic buildings are particularly good candidates for future-proofing because they have already survived for 50 to 100 years or more. Given their performance to date and appropriate interventions, historic building structures are likely to be able to last for centuries. This durability is evident in the buildings of Europe and Asia which have survived centuries and millennia. Extension of the service life of our existing building stock through sensitive interventions reduces energy consumption, decreases material waste, retains embodied energy, and promotes a long-term relationship with our built environment that is critical to the future survival of the human species on this planet.

Infrastructure projects
In addition to the aqueducts and pipelines, local or regional infrastructure such as reservoirs, dams, local pipeline systems, pump stations, water treatment, and desalination facilities could be impacted by any of several potential natural hazards. Imported water via aqueducts and pipelines stands as the most significant vulnerability due to the high volumes required, the length of travel, and the nature of the delivery system. Conventional piping infrastructure is at risk for damage in a seismic event as the materials do not generally react well to the shear stresses brought upon by earthquakes.

These projects and improvements are examples of ways in which a water infrastructure systems may be developed in a future-proof way while also addressing hazard mitigation concerns, long term adaptive cycles.

Title should be a noun
Like the lead. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:00, 23 July 2023 (UTC)