4 ms·
The author may be right for the reason that, the criticism is based on linear extrapolations of what people wanted in the past decades. Perhaps they don't want
by buboard 7y ago
The author may be right for the reason that, the criticism is based on linear extrapolations of what people wanted in the past decades. Perhaps they don't want flying cars, but instead the ability to tele-work and telecommunicate. Perhaps flying cars are the "faster horses" of our time , which will be overtaken by some yet-unknown tech in the future. Physical infrastructure is good, if there is going to be a lot of use for it. With industrial production shifting to china and then africa, there's little incentive to build new roads. There is a case to be made however about "weird" overregulation in biotech/medicine. As populations are aging we will be forced to remove barriers and move faster there.
The author's conclusion "Silicon Valley will almost certainly keep playing a big role in them" is not well justified imho. Silicon Valley has failed in most its major promises in 2010s: VR, IoT, blockchain, Selfdriving robots (and soon satellite internet). Instead, the advertising money that is fueling its economy, is being recycled through SaaS/Paas companies that make the developers job ever-so-slightly easier, creating a closed, inward looking economy. IMHO , the real failure is the lack of ambitious consumer-facing tech