3 ms·
I'd posit that the more advanced tech is, the more it's likely to not be immortal. I wouldn't be surprised that while people are still making parts for Stanley
by dmitriid 6y ago
I'd posit that the more advanced tech is, the more it's likely to not be immortal.
I wouldn't be surprised that while people are still making parts for Stanley steam-powered cars, no one will be making Tesla parts 100 years from now.
- tacitusarc 6y agoA crucial point of the article is that it's about the technology, not the particular implementation. So in your example, it would be EVs that need to go extinct, not Tesla.
- dmitriid 6y agoIt might be both, because we could bend the definitions and what we consider tech or a gadget every which way :) Like punchcards and related technologies are probably dead, for all intents and purposes. But you could argue that the ideas and the resulting tech (computers and programming) behind them lives on.