This article may (or may not:) be a little short sighted. Basically it claims the inventions of what it terms "The third industrial revolution" (computers) aff

This article may (or may not:) be a little short sighted. Basically it claims the inventions of what it terms "The third industrial revolution" (computers) affect a much narrower slice of life than the proceeding industrial revolutions. So they won't produce the growth the proceeding revolutions did and the rapid growth is over. But earlier in the article: "GORDON: When we had the invention of steam engines, steam ships, locomotives, factories making cotton fabrics, and then the telegraph. All of those things were invented in the century between 1770 and 1870. And they set the stage for the inventions that happened after 1870. " So there was a lag between the large number of invention and the true realization of potential in subsequent inventions and thus improvements in life. First of all I don't think digital technology does affect a narrower slice of life when looked at in broader terms. I think it affects an even greater slice of life. True we have a bunch of cat videos and Facebook but that's just the surface. But the main point, going back to the lag, I believe that is where we are now. We have the technology and are really just getting started with what it can do. Digital technology hasn't really infiltrated everywhere it can and many things are still being done in inefficient ways. When the subsequent set of innovations begin to appear I think we will see an even greater increase in standard of living than the previous industrial revolutions. More efficient distribution mechanisms. Better control over biology (including our own). Automation and robotics. Things like that. Social structures need to catch up though also... likely part of the reason for the lag.