6 ms·

A lot of what our parents generation did: building interstate highways, Manhattan Project, etc, could not be done today. Being the only remaining superpower (a

by edw519 16y ago

A lot of what our parents generation did: building interstate highways, Manhattan Project, etc, could not be done today. Being the only remaining superpower (and having little global military competition) really takes the wind out of government's sails of achievement. Interstate highways, the Manhattan project, the space program, national infrastructure, aerospace, much medical technology, and even computers were all borne out of military necessity. With so many bad guys around the globe, only a traitor could vote against these things. Our parents built the stuff needed to save the world. We're building better ways to instantly share our bowel habits. I don't know whether to laugh or to cry.

kenjackson 16y ago
I'd love to find links to old newspaper articles talking about building interstate highways and such. Doing nearly anything today seems like it is near impossible. The costs, the time, and the political divisiveness (at even the city local level) makes doing a monorail or adding a line seem like Roe v Wade.
- narrator 16y ago
  The health care debate in the U.S is a microcosm of all this. The only thing that people argue about is how much more money we're going to spend on it, and we already spend far more, as a percentage of GDP, on health care than any other nation. Any solution that has to do with process innovation, technology innovation or any sort of thing that would otherwise upset the status quo besides more money is largely ignored. There are so many vested interest involved that the only thing they can all support is even more money being poured down the same old rathole.
shakeshake 16y ago
Blah Blah Blah. Social networking was crucial for a country of highly oppressed people to overthrow their tyrannical government. Doctors can identify diseases from their phone in a way that would have taken days, we can de-salt water in way that is practical. New times, new problems. Our generation is pushing innovation at a speed that is unparalleled, don't confuse the 47 fart apps in the app store as a complete misappropriation of focus.
- jdp23 16y ago
  Yeah really. Incredible innovations affecting people's daily lives all over the world. Peter comes across as somebody who prefers his parents generation's view of how great it used to be to all the exciting and empowering stuff happening today.
- edw519 16y ago
  Blah Blah Blah. Normally, I ignore such responses, but how could I resist bait like that? Social networking was crucial for a country of high oppressed people to overthrow their tyrannical government. Ahh, the jury's still out on that one. Let's see how much less tyrannical the next government is. I bet not much. Doctors can identify diseases from their phone in a way that would have taken days To what purpose? This is the first generation with worse health and life expectency than its parents. What good is providing so much technology at so much cost to those who push so little value out of the other end of the pipeline? New times, new problems No question. All I'm wondering is, "Where is the new value?" Our generation is pushing innovation at a speed that is unparalleled Versus what? Citing, please. Hmmm, lets see... From 1910 to 1960: The masses received first value from the automobile, the airplane, the telephone, radio, television, electricity, indoor plumbing, sewage treatment, and antibiotics. From 1960 to 2010: We can carry our phones with us. Cool. don't confuse the 47 fart apps in the app store as a complete misappropriation of focus Opps, I completely forgot about smart phones. I was referring to all the instant communications we now have that produce so much activity and so little value. Is that all we've got?
  - garry 16y ago
    > I was referring to all the instant communications we now have that produce so much activity and so little value. Is that all we've got? We are more connected with people than ever. And future generations will be even more so. I get that there's a general sentiment that spending more time on Facebook or Twitter isn't valuable "real people time." But I'll be contrarian and say it is. I've kept in touch with more of the people I care about AND have deeper relationships with them because of social software and mobile communications tech. Yes, because of Facebook, Skype, and the panoply of other innovations that may seem like just pointless activity.
_delirium 16y ago
It's a strange example to use in a story bemoaning the decline in startup innovation as well, since the interstate highway system and the Manhattan Project were not exactly things done by startups.
- jdp23 16y ago
  Yeah, particularly strange for somebody who sees himself as a libertarian. Oh well. "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds."
danenania 16y ago
China has no problem taking on projects like these. It's very naive to tout the benefits of central authority without considering the costs. A government that has the power to push through massive public projects isn't going stop there. One of the main reasons projects on this scale are so difficult to organize is that there are so many independent stakeholders with diverging interests. Glorifying the state's ability to steamroll these interests for the sake of 'progress' is dangerous stuff.
- jbooth 16y ago
  Do you have any examples of egregious civil rights violations as a consequence of the moon mission? I mean, having some sense of investing in your country and future doesn't mean you have to massacre people in Tiananmen square.
  - danenania 16y ago
    The same politicians and ideas that motivated funding for those missions were directly responsible for horrific wars in Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, and many other countries during that period. I'd gladly trade our man on the moon to erase those wars and the philosophy that led to them from our history. In sum: fuck nationalism.
    - jbooth 16y ago
      Generally speaking, the politicians most in favor of nationalistic wars are those who are most opposed to domestic infrastructure speaking. Just saying.
      - danenania 16y ago
        Maybe so, though the space program is a clear exception and I think there are plenty of others--the modern 'neoconservative' platform, for example, pushes for high levels of both military and domestic spending, and is firmly rooted in nationalism. The point is that unchecked domestic power generally implies unchecked military power. And then there's the secret police...
muhfuhkuh 16y ago
All those things you said are government projects. We just tried a grand experiment to see if we could usher in a new era of healthcare and were met with strong resistance, oddly enough, from the _very same generation_ widely credited with producing all of those things (Interstate, Manhattan project, space program) that you mentioned. Those radical free-thinking minds are now more conservative as they grow older, those notions of revolution are replaced by memories and a strong desire to put things back to "how they used to be". Now, people in their 20s and 30s, the ones that are supposed to be revolutionary, are worried about finding jobs, putting food on the table, and keeping work so that they can keep their healthcare plan. So, the big companies that used to work on big things and revolutionary technology, can now focus on extracting as much profit per product as they can (not that they didn't before, but there was, as you and this article admits freely, more focus on radical innovation and Doing Big Things). Instead of "revolutionary new products and projects" we get "refreshes" and marketing of said refreshes as "revolutionary". The bottom line is more secure, the worker subjugated, and thus the Empire retreats, stage right.
- aristus 16y ago
  You are confusing your generations. The people currently in power are 50-70 years old, ie born in 1940-1960. They were children during the WWII era and Eisenhower administration, and had nothing to do with the Bomb, the Apollo program or interstates. For example, Feynman, one of the "young kids" of the Manhattan project, was born in 1918.
  - muhfuhkuh 16y ago
    So, it's the Baby Boomers, the _children_ of the Greatest Generation that did all those great government infrastructure and technology buildouts, who are holding us back from being able to do those great things again? My mistake, then! But then it begs the question: Why do they want to do that?
    - jdp23 16y ago
      Because they're scared of losing their power and being left behind by new technologies. And because they'd rather invest in life extension.
ippisl 16y ago
I don't think there's a lack of radical innovation. maybe it's less concentrated in silicon valley , but all across the u.s. and worldwide you can see radical innovations unfolding. Things like robotics and artificial intelligence are probably the most radical technologies since the industrial revolution. probably much more radical. And what about clean energy and clean technology ? the solution to the biggest problem of the 21th century ? and on the way make our chemical manufacturing clean ? And what about stem cells ? they hold the potential to be a cure to many chronic diseases. And telepresence , the holodeck at every home? Things just take time , that's all.
atrevisan 16y ago
I don't think you can compare generational innovation. These things are all relative. It's hard for me to believe that today's minds who are building a supercomputer that can reproduce human logic and understanding couldn't produce the Manhattan Project. We aren't becoming more short-term focused, rather the future is shrinking. A 20 year time frame in past generations is now 3 years. In this day, if you have a long-term scope and vision you will become obsolete in five years. Adaptation is crucial to innovation as well.

by edw519 16y ago

kenjackson 16y ago

I'd love to find links to old newspaper articles talking about building interstate highways and such. Doing nearly anything today seems like it is near impossible. The costs, the time, and the political divisiveness (at even the city local level) makes doing a monorail or adding a line seem like Roe v Wade.

narrator 16y ago
The health care debate in the U.S is a microcosm of all this. The only thing that people argue about is how much more money we're going to spend on it, and we already spend far more, as a percentage of GDP, on health care than any other nation. Any solution that has to do with process innovation, technology innovation or any sort of thing that would otherwise upset the status quo besides more money is largely ignored. There are so many vested interest involved that the only thing they can all support is even more money being poured down the same old rathole.

shakeshake 16y ago

Blah Blah Blah. Social networking was crucial for a country of highly oppressed people to overthrow their tyrannical government. Doctors can identify diseases from their phone in a way that would have taken days, we can de-salt water in way that is practical. New times, new problems. Our generation is pushing innovation at a speed that is unparalleled, don't confuse the 47 fart apps in the app store as a complete misappropriation of focus.

jdp23 16y ago
Yeah really. Incredible innovations affecting people's daily lives all over the world. Peter comes across as somebody who prefers his parents generation's view of how great it used to be to all the exciting and empowering stuff happening today.
edw519 16y ago
Blah Blah Blah. Normally, I ignore such responses, but how could I resist bait like that? Social networking was crucial for a country of high oppressed people to overthrow their tyrannical government. Ahh, the jury's still out on that one. Let's see how much less tyrannical the next government is. I bet not much. Doctors can identify diseases from their phone in a way that would have taken days To what purpose? This is the first generation with worse health and life expectency than its parents. What good is providing so much technology at so much cost to those who push so little value out of the other end of the pipeline? New times, new problems No question. All I'm wondering is, "Where is the new value?" Our generation is pushing innovation at a speed that is unparalleled Versus what? Citing, please. Hmmm, lets see... From 1910 to 1960: The masses received first value from the automobile, the airplane, the telephone, radio, television, electricity, indoor plumbing, sewage treatment, and antibiotics. From 1960 to 2010: We can carry our phones with us. Cool. don't confuse the 47 fart apps in the app store as a complete misappropriation of focus Opps, I completely forgot about smart phones. I was referring to all the instant communications we now have that produce so much activity and so little value. Is that all we've got?
- garry 16y ago
  > I was referring to all the instant communications we now have that produce so much activity and so little value. Is that all we've got? We are more connected with people than ever. And future generations will be even more so. I get that there's a general sentiment that spending more time on Facebook or Twitter isn't valuable "real people time." But I'll be contrarian and say it is. I've kept in touch with more of the people I care about AND have deeper relationships with them because of social software and mobile communications tech. Yes, because of Facebook, Skype, and the panoply of other innovations that may seem like just pointless activity.

_delirium 16y ago

It's a strange example to use in a story bemoaning the decline in startup innovation as well, since the interstate highway system and the Manhattan Project were not exactly things done by startups.

jdp23 16y ago
Yeah, particularly strange for somebody who sees himself as a libertarian. Oh well. "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds."

danenania 16y ago

China has no problem taking on projects like these. It's very naive to tout the benefits of central authority without considering the costs. A government that has the power to push through massive public projects isn't going stop there. One of the main reasons projects on this scale are so difficult to organize is that there are so many independent stakeholders with diverging interests. Glorifying the state's ability to steamroll these interests for the sake of 'progress' is dangerous stuff.

jbooth 16y ago
Do you have any examples of egregious civil rights violations as a consequence of the moon mission? I mean, having some sense of investing in your country and future doesn't mean you have to massacre people in Tiananmen square.
- danenania 16y ago
  The same politicians and ideas that motivated funding for those missions were directly responsible for horrific wars in Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, and many other countries during that period. I'd gladly trade our man on the moon to erase those wars and the philosophy that led to them from our history. In sum: fuck nationalism.
  - jbooth 16y ago
    Generally speaking, the politicians most in favor of nationalistic wars are those who are most opposed to domestic infrastructure speaking. Just saying.
    - danenania 16y ago
      Maybe so, though the space program is a clear exception and I think there are plenty of others--the modern 'neoconservative' platform, for example, pushes for high levels of both military and domestic spending, and is firmly rooted in nationalism. The point is that unchecked domestic power generally implies unchecked military power. And then there's the secret police...

muhfuhkuh 16y ago

All those things you said are government projects. We just tried a grand experiment to see if we could usher in a new era of healthcare and were met with strong resistance, oddly enough, from the _very same generation_ widely credited with producing all of those things (Interstate, Manhattan project, space program) that you mentioned. Those radical free-thinking minds are now more conservative as they grow older, those notions of revolution are replaced by memories and a strong desire to put things back to "how they used to be". Now, people in their 20s and 30s, the ones that are supposed to be revolutionary, are worried about finding jobs, putting food on the table, and keeping work so that they can keep their healthcare plan. So, the big companies that used to work on big things and revolutionary technology, can now focus on extracting as much profit per product as they can (not that they didn't before, but there was, as you and this article admits freely, more focus on radical innovation and Doing Big Things). Instead of "revolutionary new products and projects" we get "refreshes" and marketing of said refreshes as "revolutionary". The bottom line is more secure, the worker subjugated, and thus the Empire retreats, stage right.

aristus 16y ago
You are confusing your generations. The people currently in power are 50-70 years old, ie born in 1940-1960. They were children during the WWII era and Eisenhower administration, and had nothing to do with the Bomb, the Apollo program or interstates. For example, Feynman, one of the "young kids" of the Manhattan project, was born in 1918.
- muhfuhkuh 16y ago
  So, it's the Baby Boomers, the _children_ of the Greatest Generation that did all those great government infrastructure and technology buildouts, who are holding us back from being able to do those great things again? My mistake, then! But then it begs the question: Why do they want to do that?
  - jdp23 16y ago
    Because they're scared of losing their power and being left behind by new technologies. And because they'd rather invest in life extension.

ippisl 16y ago

I don't think there's a lack of radical innovation. maybe it's less concentrated in silicon valley , but all across the u.s. and worldwide you can see radical innovations unfolding. Things like robotics and artificial intelligence are probably the most radical technologies since the industrial revolution. probably much more radical. And what about clean energy and clean technology ? the solution to the biggest problem of the 21th century ? and on the way make our chemical manufacturing clean ? And what about stem cells ? they hold the potential to be a cure to many chronic diseases. And telepresence , the holodeck at every home? Things just take time , that's all.

atrevisan 16y ago

I don't think you can compare generational innovation. These things are all relative. It's hard for me to believe that today's minds who are building a supercomputer that can reproduce human logic and understanding couldn't produce the Manhattan Project. We aren't becoming more short-term focused, rather the future is shrinking. A 20 year time frame in past generations is now 3 years. In this day, if you have a long-term scope and vision you will become obsolete in five years. Adaptation is crucial to innovation as well.