I'm wondering what people think about Peter Thiel's view that we've been stagnant for decades now in terms of meaningful technological innovations outside of computers and the internet.
Here's another quote of his on the same theme.
| You have as much computing power in your iPhone as was available at the time of the Apollo missions. But what is it being used for? It’s being used to throw angry birds at pigs; it’s being used to send pictures of your cat to people halfway around the world; it’s being used to check in as the virtual mayor of a virtual nowhere while you’re riding a subway from the nineteenth century.” |
Link - (
New Window )
Safer cars? More fuel-efficient cars?
As for planes, are the ones militaries are using these days a wee bit better than the ones they were using 60 years ago? I kind of think so.
I'd argue the automotive innovations have been more incremental improvements than anything. Cars are more fuel efficient, but still use the same basic ICE.
Autonomous driving (even in a limited sense) would be more in the "disruptive" tech category. And the technology is close (less than a decade) to have fairly autonomous vehicles. The regulatory environment (and public perception) is probably a decade or 2 behind that though.
Commerical aviation, the biggest innovation would be the Dreamliner. Most of the other "new" planes were again just incremental improvements.
As for space exploration, a lot of the robotic missions are more about applying lessons learned from prior missions and taking advantage of the explosion in computing power. That's a far cry from the work NASA did in terms of GPS, manned flight, general avionics, propulsion, etc. Though NASA (and others) have made huge strides in robotics.
Sure some of our modes of transportation might be a bit archaic but until someone bulids a functioning transporter for Scotty he's goijng to have to tough it out like the rest of us.
mobile computing hasn't made a difference in our lives?
advances in telecommunications?
i can communicate right now with somebody on the other side of the planet for free. with video, voice, documents and images. i don't have to fly around the planet to have effective meaningful communication and collaboration.
and we're on the verge of another breakthrough with 3d printing. it's becoming more accessible and more applicable with new materials and techniques.
i can find out almost anything i want without getting out of my chair. my knowledge is infinite.
this has only occurred over the last 1 1/2 decades. we don't even know what the effect of the internet search engine will be on our rate of advancement. we'll know in another 2 or 3 decades.
Safer cars? More fuel-efficient cars?
As for planes, are the ones militaries are using these days a wee bit better than the ones they were using 60 years ago? I kind of think so.
Just to throw this out there how much of the advancements could we of had if the big oil companies didn't put the Kibosh on them?
Despite the advances in robotics and med tech, much of what we have accomplished over the last 20 years has been centered around service and entertainment. We haven't had a massive breakthrough the likes of a moon landing, national highway system, et al - things that required massive public investment and paid off exponentially for decades.
I think that's what might the writer might be getting at.
The article is way off base.
--Massive increases in the use of the genome to improve health care, in ways such as cures for cancer;
--Ways to deal with chronic diseases like diabetes that are only in their early stages;
--Massively cheaper energy sources
--Crowd-sourced technological innovation that can put hundreds of thousands of brains to work on a single idea;
--Super-cheap on-line education available to virtually everyone through low-cost cell phones;
And on and on.
I use "The Second Machine Age" as my go-to source, but there are, many, many others. The entire book is now on-line, free. (linked)
The ignorance among supposedly smart people about how accelerating technological change is changing the world, and will continue to do so, is kind of mind-boggling. There was a major paper at Jackson Hole this year from an economist at MIT of all places, that seemed to think that Moore's Law is entirely about being able to do arithmetic more quickly. He apparently never heard of the massive pockets of technological ingenuity at his own University.
His paper is here:
http://www.kc.frb.org/publicat/sympos/2014/2014.0818.autor.handout.pdf
There are major downsides to all this change, in terms of hard competition between humans and increasingly sophisticated robots and computers, and real problems for income disparity that the technologists seem to think will magically go away. They are wrong, imo. But, in the meantime, the amount of new, cheap "stuff" that will be generated by technology is pretty mindboggling.
Ray Kurzweil is one of the great futurists. One of his better pieces is here:
http://www.technologyreview.com/view/425818/kurzweil-responds-dont-underestimate-the-singularity/
There is so much changing, so fast, that Thiel's thesis is just silly. Surprisingly so.
--
Link - ( New Window )
Oh bullshit. There are dozens of reasons why such things have stagnated, to the extent that they have, that don't rely on simple-minded blaming of chosen scapegoats.
Now i can see whatever game i want on my 50 inch high defenition flat screen.We have come a long way since then.
Quote:
The influence of big pharma and big oil in our politics may be the biggest reason for stagnation in advances in medicine, energy and transportation.
Oh bullshit. There are dozens of reasons why such things have stagnated, to the extent that they have, that don't rely on simple-minded blaming of chosen scapegoats.
Dozens? Name one. Name any reason that doesn't in some way go back to politics.
And big pharma has delivered a great deal of improvement in the same time period, to say that they've stagnated strains credulity.
Are relationships better now that you can basically put people under surveillance?
Obviously a lot of new and interesting things have come about because of the computer revolution, but at the most fundamentally human level has it made us better, happier people?
Mr. deGrasse Tyson concurs, and he's pissed about it...
We Stopped Dreaming - ( New Window )
Are relationships better now that you can basically put people under surveillance?
Obviously a lot of new and interesting things have come about because of the computer revolution, but at the most fundamentally human level has it made us better, happier people?
Depends on how you use it.
Are relationships better now that you can basically put people under surveillance?
Obviously a lot of new and interesting things have come about because of the computer revolution, but at the most fundamentally human level has it made us better, happier people?
I was able to catch my grandmother's last breaths because she texted me her physical thoughts before she reached the hospital. My wife sent me sonographs of our "child" while I was at work; clearly another unnecessary malfeasance than muddles our relationship...?
You sound like a fucking moron
Link - ( New Window )
Radio
Transistors
Cars
airplanes
computers
antibiotics
indoor plumbing and clean water
television
plastics (including nylons - Yea!)
telephones
He used the example of someone from the last half of the 19th century being transported to the first half of the next and being amazed and dumfounded at many of the things to be seen.
Where somebody from the first half of the 20th century to the 2nd would still recognize and understand phones, TVs, cars, planes etc. Yes vastly improved but hardly extraordinary.
Wish I could find the article again, it was petty thought provoking.
--Massive increases in the use of the genome to improve health care, in ways such as cures for cancer;
--Ways to deal with chronic diseases like diabetes that are only in their early stages;
--Massively cheaper energy sources
--Crowd-sourced technological innovation that can put hundreds of thousands of brains to work on a single idea;
--Super-cheap on-line education available to virtually everyone through low-cost cell phones;
And on and on.
I use "The Second Machine Age" as my go-to source, but there are, many, many others. The entire book is now on-line, free. (linked)
The ignorance among supposedly smart people about how accelerating technological change is changing the world, and will continue to do so, is kind of mind-boggling. There was a major paper at Jackson Hole this year from an economist at MIT of all places, that seemed to think that Moore's Law is entirely about being able to do arithmetic more quickly. He apparently never heard of the massive pockets of technological ingenuity at his own University.
His paper is here:
http://www.kc.frb.org/publicat/sympos/2014/2014.0818.autor.handout.pdf
There are major downsides to all this change, in terms of hard competition between humans and increasingly sophisticated robots and computers, and real problems for income disparity that the technologists seem to think will magically go away. They are wrong, imo. But, in the meantime, the amount of new, cheap "stuff" that will be generated by technology is pretty mindboggling.
Ray Kurzweil is one of the great futurists. One of his better pieces is here:
http://www.technologyreview.com/view/425818/kurzweil-responds-dont-underestimate-the-singularity/
There is so much changing, so fast, that Thiel's thesis is just silly. Surprisingly so.
-- Link - ( New Window )
This
Innovations occur so fast that they are not news or noted anymore.
I thought that myself!!
Imagine the wreaks. The carnage would be unbelievable.
I think I might have to wear two ties to work on October 21, 2015.
2. Autos - My first car, 40 years ago, got about 16 MPG highway. My current car, about the same size, gets about 38. You can argue it should be better, but a 238% improvement ain't nothing.
3. 140 characters might have helped the Arab Spring, but it also led to loads of misinformation after the Boston Marathon bombing. It's a technology that provides benefits if used properly, but negative results if used improperly. And given the tendency on the part of some to claim in depth knowledge of a subject based on reading 140 characters, I'd say the jury is still out.
4. Clearly there have been advances in medical technology. The system, however, is still screwed up.
Link - ( New Window )
So I would suggest to Mr. Thiel that at current markets, more people wanted 140 characters than flying cars.
I think price and safety concerns have held back flying cars.
Forget flying, lets get a new viable power source to run our transportation first