3 ms·

> '[except for] the exponential increase in computing power.' That would be incremental improvement, not major technological change. Take this list from the a

> '[except for] the exponential increase in computing power.' That would be incremental improvement, not major technological change. Take this list from the article: > In our century, for better or worse, progress isn't what it used to be. Northwestern University economist Robert Gordon argues that by 1970, all the key technologies of modern life were in place: sanitation, electricity, mechanized agriculture, highways, air travel, telecommunications, and the like. Most of the major technological changes in computing were already available by 1980: Software compatibility across computer generations (IBM 360), microprocessors and personal computing (8-bit micros like the Apple II), packet-switched networking, GUIs (Alto), all the major modern types of programming languages (imperative, functional, object-oriented), etc. Most of the seemingly big things that have happened since fall more into the category of incremental improvements and popularizations than "major technological change."

navaati 7y ago
The big one missing is mobile telecommunication/computing. Basically the last most transformative tech since your list is the lithium battery I guess ? And this transformative effect keeps on giving, with the transition to renewables and "electrified everything" (such as cars, but not only).
- CharlesColeman 7y ago
  > The big one missing is mobile telecommunication/computing. The major technological advancements that permitted that are old. Cellular telephone technology dates to the 70s/80s, etc.
  - beat 7y ago
    And where will DNA editing be in 40 years?
    - CharlesColeman 7y ago
      The thesis isn't that major advancements aren't happening, but that they're happening more slowly. Or maybe more accurately, there was an period in the 20th century that is now over where major advancements happened unusually quickly.
      - beat 7y ago
        That thesis is not well supported by the article, and I didn't see it referencing better-quality material. And it grossly overestimates the speed of changes. My father farmed with a mule in the 1950s.
      - tossAfterUsing 7y ago
        not to bang the trope drum too loudly, but Kurzweil mentions this phenomenon when describing the way that growth looks exponential over a long scale, but feels more like S-curves[1] 1- https://www.slideshare.net/olandri/l03-exponential-world https://www.slideshare.net/olandri/l03-exponential-world
nostrademons 7y ago
The structure of innovations isn't usually outward progress along a uniform frontier. Instead, one portion of the frontier proves more promising than others, innovators pour into that one area, it fragments into subfields, and then the descendants of that one field become the totality of experience for future generations. Think of the major innovations of the 1500s and early 1600s Renaissance. Exploration of the Americas, colonialism, transatlantic slave trade, Protestant reformation, joint stock corporation, parliamentary monarchy, scientific method, nation-state, alchemy, and merchant guilds. By the 1800s, the exploration of the Americas was basically complete. Colonialism was on its way out with U.S. independence (there was a subsequent era with the scramble for Africa, but that wasn't until the late 1800s). Slavery was banned in Britain and the importation of new slaves was banned in the U.S. The Protestant Reformation was old news. Alchemy had been largely debunked. Pretty much all progress was in the scientific method, and in the corporations that came to capitalize on it. Yet we don't think of the 1800s as an innovation slowdown. Rather, we think of it as a time of rapid technological progress and massive social change. We've just changed our definition of what innovation is. Things like alchemy, colonialism, and slavery are viewed as quaint anachronisms, mistakes on the march of history. It'll likely be the same with software vs. the massive manufacturing industries of the 20th century. Some of them (eg. coal power plants or gas-powered automobiles) will seem like outright mistakes; others will simply be taken for granted the way we take democracy and corporations for granted. And we'll start defining innovation in terms of different subfields of software, the same way we define industry in terms of the different subfields of automated manufacturing.
wetpaws 7y ago
There is no such thing as a non-incremental major technological change, all changes in the history of humanity took time, sometimes many decades.
lm28469 7y ago
Incremental improvement can have a life changing impacts. Google maps is just a map, we had them for thousands of years, I'm still mind blown every time I use it. A kindle is just a book, an A320 is just the same as the Wright brother's plane, &c. > Most of the major technological changes in computing were already available by 1980: Sure, but no one had access to it. Availability of tech also plays a huge role in "progress".

navaati 7y ago

The big one missing is mobile telecommunication/computing. Basically the last most transformative tech since your list is the lithium battery I guess ? And this transformative effect keeps on giving, with the transition to renewables and "electrified everything" (such as cars, but not only).

CharlesColeman 7y ago
> The big one missing is mobile telecommunication/computing. The major technological advancements that permitted that are old. Cellular telephone technology dates to the 70s/80s, etc.
- beat 7y ago
  And where will DNA editing be in 40 years?
  - CharlesColeman 7y ago
    The thesis isn't that major advancements aren't happening, but that they're happening more slowly. Or maybe more accurately, there was an period in the 20th century that is now over where major advancements happened unusually quickly.
    - beat 7y ago
      That thesis is not well supported by the article, and I didn't see it referencing better-quality material. And it grossly overestimates the speed of changes. My father farmed with a mule in the 1950s.
    - tossAfterUsing 7y ago
      not to bang the trope drum too loudly, but Kurzweil mentions this phenomenon when describing the way that growth looks exponential over a long scale, but feels more like S-curves[1] 1- https://www.slideshare.net/olandri/l03-exponential-world https://www.slideshare.net/olandri/l03-exponential-world

nostrademons 7y ago

The structure of innovations isn't usually outward progress along a uniform frontier. Instead, one portion of the frontier proves more promising than others, innovators pour into that one area, it fragments into subfields, and then the descendants of that one field become the totality of experience for future generations. Think of the major innovations of the 1500s and early 1600s Renaissance. Exploration of the Americas, colonialism, transatlantic slave trade, Protestant reformation, joint stock corporation, parliamentary monarchy, scientific method, nation-state, alchemy, and merchant guilds. By the 1800s, the exploration of the Americas was basically complete. Colonialism was on its way out with U.S. independence (there was a subsequent era with the scramble for Africa, but that wasn't until the late 1800s). Slavery was banned in Britain and the importation of new slaves was banned in the U.S. The Protestant Reformation was old news. Alchemy had been largely debunked. Pretty much all progress was in the scientific method, and in the corporations that came to capitalize on it. Yet we don't think of the 1800s as an innovation slowdown. Rather, we think of it as a time of rapid technological progress and massive social change. We've just changed our definition of what innovation is. Things like alchemy, colonialism, and slavery are viewed as quaint anachronisms, mistakes on the march of history. It'll likely be the same with software vs. the massive manufacturing industries of the 20th century. Some of them (eg. coal power plants or gas-powered automobiles) will seem like outright mistakes; others will simply be taken for granted the way we take democracy and corporations for granted. And we'll start defining innovation in terms of different subfields of software, the same way we define industry in terms of the different subfields of automated manufacturing.

wetpaws 7y ago

There is no such thing as a non-incremental major technological change, all changes in the history of humanity took time, sometimes many decades.

lm28469 7y ago

Incremental improvement can have a life changing impacts. Google maps is just a map, we had them for thousands of years, I'm still mind blown every time I use it. A kindle is just a book, an A320 is just the same as the Wright brother's plane, &c. > Most of the major technological changes in computing were already available by 1980: Sure, but no one had access to it. Availability of tech also plays a huge role in "progress".