Technology

3 Technologies Will Utterly Transform Your World in the Next Decade

Blockchain, CRISPR, and Machine Learning

|

FutureTechElfredDreamstime
Elfred/Dreamstime

Technological innovation has permanently slowed down and so too will economic growth asserts Northwestern University economist Robert Gordon. Why? Because all of the low-hanging scientific and technological fruit has supposedly been plucked. You can invent broad technologies like electrification, the light bulb, plumbing and sanitation, the telephone, refrigeration, the internal combustion engine, and the digital computer only once. Therefore most new technologies will consist of slight improvements on the old ones and that will not propel future economic growth.

But have all broad technologies really been invented already? Below are three core technologies whose elaborations during the next decade will conjure into existence a world with far less transactional friction, amazing cures, and much smarter machines.

The digital currency Bitcoin is the first way most folks heard of blockchain technology. By one simple definition, a blockchain is a kind of independent, transparent, and permanent database coexisting in multiple locations and shared by a community. (For nice simple explanation of how blockchains work, go here.) The beauty of a public distributed a blockchain is that records are permanent and cannot easily be falsified. It basically solves the problem of trust since everyone can see what was agreed to and what transactions actually have taken place.

Much of human society is structured with the aim of establishing trust through third parties, e.g., keeping track of who owns what; what was agreed to; and was the transaction completed. Think of intermediary institutions ranging from banks, stock markets, and property registries to the coercive functions of the state to mandate currencies, and enforce contracts. Third parties are trusted to keep track of information and generally take a cut of the action for their trouble.

Blockchain technology will cut out the middlemen and increase trust in records. Transactions can be securely paid for using blockchain currencies such as Bitcoin (which is rising toward $1,000 in value). My Reason colleague Jim Epstein brilliantly just reported how folks in Venezuela are using Bitcoin to survive amidst the rubble of socialism in that country. Some visionaries want to put the nation-state on the blockchain, including such functions as "an ID system based on reputation, dispute resolution, voting, national income distribution, and registration of all manner of legal documents such as land deeds, wills, childcare contracts, marriage contracts, and corporate incorporations." The new startup Publicism is developing blockchain anti-censorship tools as a way to promote free speech around the world.

Of course, like all technologies, there are kinks to be worked out. Hackers have famously stolen millions in Bitcoins, investments in the DAO, and the passwords for user accounts Ethereum Project's community forum. Such incidents identify the problems and speed up the process of improving security and standardization.

Biology is kludgy and complicated and therefore biomedical and biotech progress is maddeningly slow compared to digital technologies. However, precise genome editing made possible by CRISPR greatly simplifies experimentation and will speed up the development of medical therapies, biotech enhanced crops, and even enable humanity to curate wild landscapes. CRISPR genome editing is derived from what is essentially a bacterial immune system in which how bacteria protect themselves against attacking viruses. Cheap and easy to use CRISPR can edit genes much like a word processing program can edit text. And progress has been rapid.

For example, Chinese researchers are using CRISPR in an attempt to boost immune responses in lung cancer patients. American researchers are soon to follow. CRISPR could be used to ameliorate a whole variety of genetic diseases. The gene-editing technique has successfully reversed aging in human cells. Crop scientists have used CRISPR to develop mushrooms that resist browning; cucumbers that fight off disease viruses; and wheat that is protected against powdery mildew. Since no new genes are added or subtracted, anti-biotech activists will have a hard time arguing for the application of deadening hand of regulation to the new crop varieties. CRISPR editing will also enable breeders to produce disease resistant livestock and enable sex selection so that only male calves (more meat) and female chickens (more eggs) are born.

Want to eliminate disease-carrying mosquitoes or introduced species from the landscape? CRISPR editing can create gene-drives that make sure that both copies of a targeted natural gene in sexually reproducing species are replaced with the engineered version. For example, a suppression gene-drive could bias the production of sperm containing Y chromosomes, so that only males are born. The spread of the Y-drive would result in a population crash of the targeted species. That would be a great way to get rid of the non-native mosquito species that carries the Zika virus.

Various machine-learning algorithms are being deployed as increasingly effective techniques for dealing with the growing flood and complexity of data. Machine learning is a type of artificial intelligence that gives computers the ability to learn without being explicitly programmed. Such learning algorithms are generally trained to organize and extract information from being exposed to relevant data sets. It is often hard to discern exactly how the algorithm is devising the rules from which it makes predictions.

In March 2016, Google's AlphaGo artificial intelligence program defeated South Korean world Go champion Lee Sedol. Most interestingly, AlphaGo deployed strategies and moves never before used by human beings, thus improving future human play. More practically speaking, IBM is using machine learning to develop its Watson medical diagnostic programs to diagnose cancer and heart disease. The development of self-driving cars is also being advanced through machine learning. And thanks to deep learning, the universal translator is not too far in the future. Amazon, Google, and Microsoft are democratizing machine learning by offering it as a service through their cloud data platforms.

Microsoft's Bill Gates is right when he observed: "I think the idea that innovation is slowing down is one of the stupidest things anybody ever said."

Happy New Year.

Advertisement

NEXT: Donald Trump Does Not Really Have a Plan to Fix the V.A.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Three Technologies Will Utterly Transform Your World in the Next Decade
    Blockchain, CRISPR, and Machine Learning

    I have heard such claims before. Sometimes there is a change. Sometimes no one even notices. Sometimes it is an embarassment for the people claiming it.

    I will wait for the change to come along, then decide.

    1. I admire your entrepreneurial spirit and adventurous outlook. There is NOTHING worse than being embarrassed. And wasting time learning about emerging technologies is a mug’s game.

    2. These are the kind of changes that occur in the background, that will dramatically improve our lives, but it will not be obvious that it has done so. Your average person will be able to have “plausible deniability”.

  2. Microsoft’s Bill Gates is right when he observed: “I think the idea that innovation is slowing down is one of the stupidest things anybody ever said.”

    Bill Gates in 1981 at a trade show: “640K ought to be enough for anybody.”

    Claims he didn’t say it, but wouldn’t you say the same thing if you said something so stupid?

    1. I admit that I once questioned why one would need a Gigahertz processor. It was a mistake, I know that now.

        1. This was 2000, the dual core hadn’t been introduced, and multiprocessor systems literally had a second socket. The first 1GHz cores were coming onto the market at the time, and I was an intern doing desktop support.

        2. Or 1 brand of deoderant

      1. Heh, I remember my dad chortling about my uncle buying a computer with a 40MB hard drive many moons ago – “The salesman sure knew a rube when he saw one, huh? Why would you ever need that much memory?”

    2. I remember the powerhouse my first computer was … *two* floppy drives and a whopping 20Mb hard drive. I was never gonna fill that thing up. One 360K floppy held the entire operating system plus utilities. I think I still have the DOS 1.0 disk around.

    3. I think I spent $2000 for a computer with a 20Mb hard drive around that time. While everyone else was stuck booting up their computer by flipping floppies around. Those were the days. And I’d bet that computers booted up faster then than now.

      1. You think that computers booting from floppies or HDs is faster than booting from SSDs? /facepalm

    1. Have you seen people drive in 2 dimensions?

      Flying cars will have to wait for autonomous vehicles, as only a small percentage of humans are capable of driving in 3D.

      1. You expect people to trust their lives to autopilot?!

        /clueless luddite

      2. If BF1942 taught me anything, it’s that I should not ever be allowed to pilot an aircraft.

      3. Even KHAN, with his superior intellect, had difficulty grasping three-dimensional thinking.

        1. I almost made that reference.

      4. “Have you seen people drive in 2 dimensions?

        Flying cars will have to wait for autonomous vehicles, as only a small percentage of humans are capable of driving in 3D.”

        That’s a self-fixing problem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwinism

  3. Most articles about the future should be stored carefully, then consulted after enough time has passed to test the predictive value.

    Sometimes some article predicts something worth investing in, but it’s hard to tell such articles from the BS, so there’s a certain risk of losing one’s shirt.

    1. Index Funds.

      You miss out on the huge gains, but you get a piece of them.

      The downside is of course the huge black swans, like the entire market ending (Typical market crashes are buying opportunties, not black swans). But in that case, I have bigger problems.

    2. TF: Disclosure: I have actually invested in two CRISPR companies. Disclaimer: Anyone taking investment advice from me is being ridiculously reckless with their children’s inheritance.

      1. We know you’re hopelessly optimistic and technophillic, Ron.

        1. We all know what Bailey really wants, those sweet, sweet robo-dongs.

          1. OK, that got weird quickly, or by H&R standards, slowly.

          2. Speaking of which, Bailey left out numbah four: teledildonics.

      2. Angel, through a fund, or public markets?
        Always looking for an opportunity to bet the children’s inheritance…the government gets more that way…

  4. OT

    http://m.gazette.com/colorado-…..le/1593146

    Magpul Industries announced a mega-deal to supply ammunition magazines to the Marines last week, a boon for Cheyenne and a loss for Colorado.

    Frustration was in the voice of Colorado Senate President Kevin Grantham Tuesday.

    “My take is there is no big surprise here,” said the Republican leader from Canon City. “You tell a company they can’t sell a product in your state, when it’s a good product and a popular product. They move across the state line, they get a lot of support and they get a big contract. We lost not only the jobs they had when they were here, we lost the jobs they’ve grown into since and we’re losing all the jobs they’re going to grow into in future years with this contract.

    “Once you have the Marine contract, I don’t see how the other branches won’t follow suit eventually. That’s a massive, massive contract just a short distance down the road. We lost that.”

    1. Are their magazines any good?

      1. they’re fine. good value. though can’t vouch for their 40rd.

      2. Print is dead.

        1. Wasn’t there a design for a 3d-printed magazine out there?

          1. Yes, Mr. Cody Wilson and Defense Distributed put out one in response to their being banned in several states. I like his table top CNC mill to finish the 80% AR receivers without being regulated.

      3. Better than GI IMO, lighter as well. Plus thoughtful features, like a place to retain paint for serial numbering.

    2. Trust me, Colorado proggies in the nefarious Denver/Boulder/Aspen troika still think the stupid and unenforceable magazine ban was a good idea. Because feelz.

      1. California metastasizing.

        1. Precisely the reason Mrs. Animal and I are currently looking for a house in the Mat-Su area in Alaska. Wasilla, Palmer, maybe one of the better areas in Eagle River.

    3. “Once you have the Marine contract, I don’t see how the other branches won’t follow suit eventually. That’s a massive, massive contract just a short distance down the road. We lost that.”

      But businesses fled NC and *will* flee TX because Birth Transgender Bathroom Certificates! WTF is wrong with these local legislatures?!?! It’s like they don’t even know the meaning of the word jerbs!

      /sarc

  5. Is it terrible to think that developments like mass electrification and plumbing aren’t just low-hanging fruit, but inevitable and kinda unimpressive achievements? And that literal moonshots like going to the moon are boutique, almost hobbyist accomplishments?

    Also, everything else sucks and we’ll all die miserable anyway.

    1. Agreed. Especially given the frequency that plumbing like technologies have been used by many societies for thousands of years. Are we saying that the wheel was out pinnacle?

      Considering breakthroughs in nano and medicine I think saying we are slowing is a pessimistic thought. Moore’s law may soon fail, but no one will ever need faster computers. Ok, that was sarcasm.

      1. Just consider the smart phone. Isaac Asimov wrote stories set 100 years in the future where men would go to the public Oracle (library) to consult a massive database run by a giant building sized computer..

        I can google it from my smart phone.

        We are living in the future, we just fail to notice it.

  6. You know what, I’m just going to let it be a surprise for you people.

    1. I always confuse you and the Time Cube guy.

      For some reason I thought it was one and the same.

      1. I’m not even sure if I should be insulted. I’m not a conspiracy theorist robc, I’m just a man from the future who faxes things to Art Bell.

  7. “And the TRUMP said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.”

  8. I think bitcoins and GMOs are both cool as hell, and already having an impact on the “real” world, but why is beating a Go champion a big deal? Didn’t Gary Kasparov already claim that dubious honor in chess? Or is this the insidious racism of thinking that Asians are smarter than everybody else so their computers (and boardgames) must be smarter too?

    1. Go is much more complex than chess, at least from a brute force perspective.

      1. Interesting. I was kinda joking; I remember the fact that I played it as a kid, but not the actual experience.

    2. What robc said. It’s much harder to make a program that plays Go effectively.

    3. Well, beating world champions in something are basically showy examples of how far the technology has come.

      As for Go versus Chess, I haven’t seen this formalized, but I assume a lot of the difficulty comes from the higher combinatorial overhead of Go. The way these algorithms work is by looking at the current board position, then all moves they could make from here, and all moves that can happen from there, and all moves that happen from there… until they reach moves where they win. They then choose the most likely move to lead them towards a positive conclusion.

      In Chess there is a set of legally allowed moves at a given time, this is smaller than in Go, where you can place a piece on any open space at any time, combine this with the fact that the Go board is bigger as well, and the combinatorial explosion is even bigger.

      Another interesting thing about Go playing AIs, is that they will often make very counterintuitive moves that lead them away from strategies that could win the game sooner. This is because they are inherently asking what is most likely overall all possible moves, and so are always playing a very long game. This means, that when the AIs play weaker human players of Go, the games last about as long as with Advanced human Go players. While if the better human played the weaker human they would tend to win very quickly, because they are more able and willing to attack perceived weaknesses.

      It’s all pretty interesting stuff.

    4. 1. The core of the system is neural nets, a more broadly applicable technique than what was used to beat Kasparov (IBM built special-purpose hardware for that one).
      2. It happened 5-20 years earlier than people predicted (which supports the belief that neural nets are surprisingly effective for a broad range of problems).

  9. Unless we manage to nuke ourselves (or build sentient AI that will nuke us) I don’t see how quality of life is going to decline for people as this century progresses.

    Mankind has proven capable of adapting to almost every problem it has had to face so show me evidence that this trend is going to change. Right now it’s simply the gambler’s fallacy applied to a bet against human progress.

    1. I can totally see how the quality of life could decline. First, there is more to quality of life than material comfort. Something like block chain sounds nice until you realize the possibilities for government control it opens up. This is especially true when you consider the advances in machine learning. The one great advantage we have over the government is our numbers. Even the worst government can’t be everywhere at once. And governments that try and pretend they are free are especially limited because they can’t really put cameras in every home and keep up that pretense. We are very fortunate in that while things like cell phones and the internet has vastly increased the government’s powers to collect data, the flood of data that has resulted has in some ways increased our privacy because the government really has no way of handling so much data. Machine learning could solve that problem.

      1. While I can see government abuse from machine learning, one of the nice things about block chains is it decentralizes, making it harder for government abuse.

        See bitcoin in Venezuela and the government trying to subpoena transactions.

        Not all technological advances lead to increased government abuse, some do actually fight back.

        1. The Venezuelans are morons. And machine learning will enable governments to monitor and control the internet in ways that are unimaginable now. So the decentralization that helps us now will no longer do so in the future once machine learning advances to the point that the government is able to monitor any electronic transaction not done over a dark net. And dark nets inevitably get discovered so those are not a solution either.

          1. The Venezuelans are morons.

            For using bitcoin instead of VenePesos or whatever they have there?

            I think that is the exact opposite of moronic.

            1. Apparently it is the Bolivar. I prefer VenePeso, but whatever.

            2. No. I mean the government.

              1. Well, yeah. I don’t think anyone is gonna disagree with that.

                That doesn’t change the fact that bitcoin is allowing Venezuelans to subvert their governments moronicity.

          2. I can’t decide if you’re being overly optimistic, or overly pessimistic.

      2. So there’s a Butlerian Jihad at some point in our near future?

        1. We can replace the computers with CRISPR-engineered Mentats, so it’ll all work out.

          1. I never used mentats – I didn’t want to get addicted.

            1. And as usual you choose the least-fun option.

          2. +1 stains become a warning

    2. It will likely at some point allow the government to finally use all of that information and create a surveillance state that would make Stalin envious. Worse still, the continued growth of electronic transactions and the death of conventional cash threatens to give the government complete control over our finances. Keynesian central planners practically have orgasms at the thought of a fully cashless society and the power that would give government to finally deal with hoarders and force people to spend money for the common good.

      Lastly, if you don’t think material comfort can get worse, take a look at what is going on in Venezuela right now.

      1. Have you read A Deepness in the Sky by Vinge?

        I think you would like the bits about ubiquitous surveillance causing civilizations to crash.

        1. Also strong AI was looked at as a silly 20th century dream or something.

        2. “Have you read A Deepness in the Sky by Vinge?”

          Coincidentally, I’m currently reading “A Fire Upon the Deep”. I plan on reading A Deepness in the Sky” in the near future.

    3. Depends on which people you’re talking about, IMO. Humanity as whole? Sure. Americans in particular? That, I’m not so sure about. I could easily see how our quality of life could decline.

    4. Stability is the core determinant of technological innovations that lead to an increase in the quality of life. Should your society become unstable, due to political revolutions, economic decline, disease or climate change (not the manmade ‘forgive us for our sins’ climate change, I’m talking about stuff like severe shifts due to volcanic eruptions that has severely negative effects on agriculture) the environment for innovation has to give way. Only if one assumes that one’s society will be consistently stable can they assume some kind of increase in the quality of life. And I question the long term stability of the model the West is attempting to create, combined with the idea that modern society is built like a house of cards. Remove the foundations, utilities, food transportation networks, the ‘social contract’ (i.e. we implicitly agree murdering each other is probably a bad way of doing things) and the whole thing comes down.

      1. It certainly doesn’t help that we’ve given universities carte blanche to denigrate and undermine the Western ideals and institutions that have proven instrumental to our geometric growth in prosperity. When you have progressives lefties and the ascendant populist alt-right joining hands to condemn liberties like speech and trade, you have a civilizational problem.

    5. The biggest threat is self aware AI that is smarter than us, and capable of making itself smarter, since then you have a god that has nothing in common with us. Which means something that will likely either be hostile, or indifferent to us and crush us simply because we’re in the way.

    6. The question is going to come down to whether technology does more to empower people living their lives, or people shitting all over other people’s lives. The latter could mean existing, powerful institutions like governments, or it could mean small decentralized groups like terrorists. In some ways, I’m more concerned about the terrorists than the governments. States take their power for granted and are stuck in their ways in many respects.

      Terrorists want to wield the same control over people’s lives as states by making examples of a few prominent rulebreakers, but they have to get much more creative in doing so. There’s much more natural selection pushing them to evolve and get smart. Considering the damage they can do with boxcutters or trucks, I can’t even imagine what would happen if we made it trivial to engineer a terrible disease or a famine or other ecological disruption. And depending on the scale of the damage achieved, it might finally push society, if it survives, to very drastic measures to deal with the risk.

    7. “Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded – here and there, now and then – are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.

      “This is known as ‘bad luck.'”

  10. There is a very interesting book on Machine Learning (ML) called the Master Algorithm by Pedro Domingos that I recommend if any of you are interested in it. Written by a major researcher in ML, it is a very accessible overview of a lot of ideas of ML and some predictions about where research is heading, written for a layman audience. I personally think his predictions are too positive, but it is interesting nonetheless.

    It almost feels weird to call ML a future technology to watch out for, when they are already the underpinning technology of most large scale data analytics, and are only getting better. I suppose they’re predicting the revolutionary jump to ML that can generalize and learn like a human, in which case we basically have “Strong AI”. I am not sold on that yet, but it will be interesting if it does happen. I think that’s farther off then current ML/AI researchers think though, as they have made that claim every 15-20 years since the birth of AI.

    1. I dislike machine learning because I don’t like the idea of my computer figuring out how to do something I don’t want it to do. I prefer my machines to be dumb. If I tell it to do the wrong thing, that’s on me. But even a benevolent learning system trying to make it easier on me just grates me the wrong way.

      1. I like it because it helps us deal with inherently ill defined problems as well. ML is just algorithms just like anything else, they are basically doing fancy math then picking the biggest number, so it’s not as foreign from purely deterministic algorithms, or whatever you want to call “dumb.”

        A classic example of an ill-defined problem is handwriting recognition. There is not really any solid rules that explicitly define all permutations of human handwritten versions of the letter “a”, moreso they are functioning within a fuzzy range of possibility that is defined versus all other characters. So, “a” exists as something in opposition to what “b” is and so on in all of the alphabet.

        Human language (Which is my personal area) is even more so, context rules and even in humans the research is showing more and more that we are doing probabilistic analysis when we listen to people talk. I am not sold on this idea that ML is currently anywhere near what human cognition does, but there are similarities if you squint and delude yourself a bit.

      2. I don’t think that’s what people mean by machine learning, they just mean letting it figure out how to mostly successfully achieve some task using a certain combination of information/actions provided to it. We’re talking about baby human stuff like “walking” and “recognizing objects visually”, not “achieve world peace”.

        1. But a system that can devise new methods and and procedures can eventually devise new algorithms and priorities. It all depends on the manner in which the growth is restricted.

          1. I… am not so sure about that. There’s a whole lot going on in our heads that is the product of millions of years of evolution, not simple undirected learning. Short of an evolutionary pressure on robots to develop those other priorities, it’s hard to understand why they would.

            1. Don’t fight the robots unless you want them to evolve ways to fight back. RoboNAP.

      3. I always envision myself racing away from a tsunami and the engine shutting down because it’s overheating.

    2. I don’t believe in true strong AI. Yes, a machine can learn and get better and mimic a human. But what a machine can’t and never will do is make its own rules and decisions beyond anything contemplated by its creator. The day they come up with a machine that spontaneously decides it no longer wants to analyze stocks or whatever its function but instead wants to write poetry or follow the NFL despite the programming language never contemplating that it could do anything except get better and better at analyzing stocks, I will believe in strong AI.

      1. I don’t believe in true strong AI.

        Much depends on definitions of “strong” and “AI”. Human level personality with current technology? Nah. With quantum computing? Seems more likely, since our brains seem to be a form of quantum computer anyway.

        1. Seems more likely, since our brains seem to be a form of quantum computer anyway.

          Poorly understood != Non-deterministic != Quantum computing

          1. You and your”facts” and “science”. Geez.

  11. Gordon:

    You can invent broad technologies like electrification, the light bulb, plumbing and sanitation, the telephone, refrigeration, the internal combustion engine, and the digital computer only once.

    I have no idea where technology is going or how it’s going to effect the world. But, at the same time, I have two problems with Gordon’s statement. First, often when a new technology become available, few people understand how it might change the world. Second, no one who was an adult when electrification became common looked ahead to see a digital computer. So, it’s not just the potential advances that RB discusses but things that no one has even contemplated that could drive human progress.

    1. Colored paint? Used to produce porn.
      Still pictures? Used to produce porn.
      Moving pictures? Used to produce porn.
      Cable TV? Used to produce porn.
      VCR? Record porn.
      DVDs. High def porn.
      Internet. Porn.
      Bluray. Porn.
      Who does know what will next empower porn?

      1. Forgot animatronics to do porn as a surrogate.

  12. Can I blockchain my driverless car’s GPS in the future? I want to eat a GMO Big Mac on my way to none of your business.

    1. Don’t you know, we’ve coded a GPS transponder into the genes of every ingredient in that Big Mac – we know where you are!

  13. So, our future will consist of mutants, murderbots, and digital money? System Shock was a warning, not a manual.

  14. Quantum Computers are another potentially disruptive technology. They may be able to factor very large numbers in a second instead of thousands of years. If so, that puts blockchain encryption and other forms of encryption currently in use in danger.

    Quantum Computers Will Change The World (YouTube)

  15. Meh. Is Windows 10 really all that big a leap over Windows 3.1? They’ve just built a lot more crap into it.

    1. I was happy with Office XP and 7. Microsoft wants to add a cartoon paperclip and I have to buy new software and a new computer.

  16. Patent Office opens in 1836
    Millionth Patent in 1911
    8 Millionth Patent in 2016 (over 1 million in last 10 years)
    In 1911 the head of the Patent Office reportedly said his office should be closed (!) since everything had been invented!
    The pace of inventing has been accelerating and shows no signs of slowing. Why do we listen to academics (and governments) on this anymore?

  17. HAPPY NEW YEARS

    I can see what your saying… Raymond `s article is surprising, last week I bought a top of the range Acura from making $4608 this-past/month and-a little over, $10,000 this past month . with-out any question its the easiest work I’ve ever had . I began this five months/ago and almost straight away startad bringin in minimum $82 per-hr

    +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+ http://www.homejobs7.com

  18. HAPPY NEW YEARS

    upto I looked at the paycheck saying $9861 , I accept that my father in law was like they say trully bringing in money in their spare time online. . there best friend haz done this less than 8 months and a short time ago repayed the dept on there appartment and bourt a great Citro?n 2CV . see at this site

    +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+ http://www.homejobs7.com

  19. Facebook gives you a great opportunity to earn 98652$ at your home.If you are some intelligent you makemany more Dollars.I am also earning many more, my relatives wondered to see how i settle my Life in few days thank GOD to you for this…You can also make cash i never tell alie you should check this I am sure you shocked to see this amazing offer…I’m Loving it!!!!
    ????????> http://www.homejobs7.com

  20. Aaliyah. I see what you mean… Edwin`s artlclee is unimaginable, on friday I bought themselves a Cadillac after making $5642 this past five weeks and-more than, 10/k lass month. this is definitely the best-job Ive ever done. I began this six months/ago and pretty much straight away was earning at least $75, per-hr. Learn More Here

    _+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+ http://www.homejobs7.com

  21. I basically profitcloseto $6k-$8k every month doing an online job. For those of you who arepreparedto do easy at home jobs for 2h-5h each day at your house and earnvaluablepaycheck while doing it…

    +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+ http://www.homejobs7.com

  22. Bentley . true that Ashley `s blurb is good… last week I got Lotus Esprit sincee geting a check for $5815 this-last/five weeks and-even more than, ten/k lass-month . without a doubt it is the easiest work I’ve ever done . I began this seven months/ago and almost immediately startad earning minimum $77… per-hour . more tips here

    +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+ http://www.homejobs7.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.