3 ms·
You say that as if, economically speaking, it is a realistic option to go back to the past. It isn't. In theory we could go back to heating with open fires. St
by candiodari 8y ago
You say that as if, economically speaking, it is a realistic option to go back to the past. It isn't.
In theory we could go back to heating with open fires. Steam engines. And so forth and so on. We can't. It wouldn't work, and with steam engines it's blatantly obvious why, and I get that with search engines it's not that obvious, but it's the same reason.
- jazzyjackson 8y agoActually there's some pretty cool stuff going on in steam engine research, if you look up "Coalition for Sustainable Rail", but that's neither here nor there. I'm still not sure what part of filtering search results explicitly instead of statistically/nondeterministically is so backwards to you. Really, what's your angle in insisting on this particular future, where everything is sorted based on personal profiles?
- candiodari 8y agoThat may be true, but I think you'll find that's further forward movement, not backward movement. I'm sure that aside from the operating principle, there are going to be huge differences between new and old steam engines. One thing I know about, for example, is nuclear power generators. They are "steam engines", sort-of. That requires a creative interpretation of how it works, as it doesn't match at all.