3 ms·

This article seems to ignore the speed at which things can be done nowadays, which makes all those 'familiar' things that bit more amazing to a 1950's traveller

This article seems to ignore the speed at which things can be done nowadays, which makes all those 'familiar' things that bit more amazing to a 1950's traveller. It also seems to set the metric for progress as the visible physical changes in the world around us. This ignores the amazing things we can do today. Need to get to the other side of the world? 24 hours max. Need to write to someone other side of the world - instant email. Need to face to face with someone on the other side of the world - instant video. Live TV from everywhere, instant access to the worlds information fight in your pocket, instant social networking when needed too. Need something built for you? Commission anyone from anywhere in the world in moments. Maybe even 3D print your complex project overnight. Got a problem? Ask for help and get responses from people around the world in seconds. Got a complaint? Publish your grievance and have it shared around millions of times, maybe even get together with your countrymen and bring down a tyrannical government using just the power of social communication. What about simulation and the power computing gives us to 'get it right first time'? We can do incredible things with minimal physical testing thanks to computer simulation. And medically - the author skips over almost the entire field of transplant surgery as just one single example. We've progressed amazingly far in medicine. Even in the last 15 years huge advances have been made in trauma care (thanks in part to Iraq/Afghan wars) that would be astounding to doctors of the 1990's let alone the 1950's. We live in a wondrous world full of things that we take for granted. Maybe the author doesn't realise just how much more connected we are nowadays and just how much more empowered an individual is in terms of knowledge and creative potential. And that's not to speak of the incredible advances in energy, materials science, social progress, reduction of poverty, transport, communication, education and scores of other fields. Just because there aren't such highly visible physical changes immediately apparent (though they're there), that doesn't mean 2015 would be any less of a stunning place.

rakoo 11y ago
You're right, but you're not rebutting his point, you're actually reinforcing it: all of those things were possible in 1950, we just made them faster. The whole point of the post is that very little is completely new, meaning (close to) not understandable to a 1950 man: > They will no doubt be impressed with miniaturization as an evolutionary spectacle, but will tend to have a context for the functional capabilities of our gizmos You say that we can now face to face with people from the other side of the world in real time -- he says if there was as much innovation (and not just refinement) as there was between 1885 and 1950, we should be able to interact with a hologram of someone from the other side of the Solar System. The real change a 1950's man would see is probably how more linked humans are (mostly first world humans though) and how much more interaction there can be.
- pixl97 11y ago
  Welcome to science. First rule, exponential growth is not capable forever. Second rule, duplicating what is already there is far easier than creating something new. The second rule is what is important. All of our 'innovation' from 1750 to 1950 was because we decided to interact with the world using the scientific method. Once we started correctly classifying observations and experiments we quickly learned the limits of physics. Light speed is light speed and there is no getting around it. Instantaneous communications over long distance is not possible. The problem we have is non scientists attempted to make predictions of the future with no understanding of how reality works. This gave us the incorrect expectation that we could use unlimited energy forever. Just using more and more energy to get the job done is not innovative. With all the easily observable gains taken early, the things we do now are highly innovative, but require massive amounts of data to do. The reduction in the amount of energy required to accomplish a task will be the legacy of our century.
- wutbrodo 11y ago
  The distinctions drawn by him (and you) seem entirely arbitrary to me. Why is an atomic bomb more than just a big bomb, and voice transmission more than just an extension of signal transmission (telegrams), but somehow real-time transmission of video is nothing new? How do the first two somehow transcend "refinement" but the latter doesn't?
imh 11y ago
Yeah, medicine is nuts. The whole field of medical imaging is magic. fMRI still blows my mind. But everything medicine is swept together as one advancement, just as everything computing related is.
- pixl97 11y ago
  To put this another way, most of medical advancement is because of computing advancement. Simply put, the amount of information processing that must occur before a medical advancement is discovered is beyond what humans with paper and pencils are capable of. The story of our future is the story of the computer.
PepeGomez 11y ago
Most of these have been possible for many decades if not longer, even if it wasn't done the same way. Before e-mail there was fax and telegraph before that. Video transmission is nothing new either, and it's honestly not really that useful when you just want to talk with somebody. I bet that by far the most common use is erotic chat... Nothing revolutionarized transport more than the railroad. Airplanes have changed very little since the 1960's. Cars have changed much more, but for all practical purposes they work exactly the same. In 1885, cars and airships were little more than a novelty. Electricity became available in the late 19th century and much of electric devices we use today were developed during the first half of the 20th century. Medicine advanced very little. Maybe we are better at treating certain injuries, but for most things, medicine can only keep you dying longer than it used to. The decades before that saw major breaktroughs like antibiotics and vaccines that actually worked and malaria was elliminated in much of the developed world. We live in a world of things we don't even fully realize we have.

rakoo 11y ago

You're right, but you're not rebutting his point, you're actually reinforcing it: all of those things were possible in 1950, we just made them faster. The whole point of the post is that very little is completely new, meaning (close to) not understandable to a 1950 man: > They will no doubt be impressed with miniaturization as an evolutionary spectacle, but will tend to have a context for the functional capabilities of our gizmos You say that we can now face to face with people from the other side of the world in real time -- he says if there was as much innovation (and not just refinement) as there was between 1885 and 1950, we should be able to interact with a hologram of someone from the other side of the Solar System. The real change a 1950's man would see is probably how more linked humans are (mostly first world humans though) and how much more interaction there can be.

pixl97 11y ago
Welcome to science. First rule, exponential growth is not capable forever. Second rule, duplicating what is already there is far easier than creating something new. The second rule is what is important. All of our 'innovation' from 1750 to 1950 was because we decided to interact with the world using the scientific method. Once we started correctly classifying observations and experiments we quickly learned the limits of physics. Light speed is light speed and there is no getting around it. Instantaneous communications over long distance is not possible. The problem we have is non scientists attempted to make predictions of the future with no understanding of how reality works. This gave us the incorrect expectation that we could use unlimited energy forever. Just using more and more energy to get the job done is not innovative. With all the easily observable gains taken early, the things we do now are highly innovative, but require massive amounts of data to do. The reduction in the amount of energy required to accomplish a task will be the legacy of our century.
wutbrodo 11y ago
The distinctions drawn by him (and you) seem entirely arbitrary to me. Why is an atomic bomb more than just a big bomb, and voice transmission more than just an extension of signal transmission (telegrams), but somehow real-time transmission of video is nothing new? How do the first two somehow transcend "refinement" but the latter doesn't?

imh 11y ago

Yeah, medicine is nuts. The whole field of medical imaging is magic. fMRI still blows my mind. But everything medicine is swept together as one advancement, just as everything computing related is.

pixl97 11y ago
To put this another way, most of medical advancement is because of computing advancement. Simply put, the amount of information processing that must occur before a medical advancement is discovered is beyond what humans with paper and pencils are capable of. The story of our future is the story of the computer.

PepeGomez 11y ago

Most of these have been possible for many decades if not longer, even if it wasn't done the same way. Before e-mail there was fax and telegraph before that. Video transmission is nothing new either, and it's honestly not really that useful when you just want to talk with somebody. I bet that by far the most common use is erotic chat... Nothing revolutionarized transport more than the railroad. Airplanes have changed very little since the 1960's. Cars have changed much more, but for all practical purposes they work exactly the same. In 1885, cars and airships were little more than a novelty. Electricity became available in the late 19th century and much of electric devices we use today were developed during the first half of the 20th century. Medicine advanced very little. Maybe we are better at treating certain injuries, but for most things, medicine can only keep you dying longer than it used to. The decades before that saw major breaktroughs like antibiotics and vaccines that actually worked and malaria was elliminated in much of the developed world. We live in a world of things we don't even fully realize we have.