4 ms·

I agree, instead of critiqueing and truly reflecting on what went wrong, and what to do to fix it; technologists are obsessed with over-praising of how things h

I agree, instead of critiqueing and truly reflecting on what went wrong, and what to do to fix it; technologists are obsessed with over-praising of how things have gotten better. It misses the point that "We could have done a lot better" if we weren't so stagnant. America was a powerhouse of innovation in 1950-1970 both in private and public sectors. The progress was impossibly exponential. First step is admission of failure. Even the valid praise that "World of bits has seen tremendous innovation" should be followed by "Why did it not progress even faster and why is there so much malaise in the world of bits (ad tech)?"

contingencies 4y ago
Real progress requires largely-uninterrupted time, space and adequate resources, cannot be readily predicted and is inherently risky. By outsourcing higher thought to the private sector, progress without immediate commercial application has been grossly disincentivized and I would argue the prerequisite culture has been lost. A 15-bit computer[0] brought us to the moon, whereas this time awash with 64 bit mobile supercomputers, infinite RAM, search engines and cloud computing has brought us high profile failures in corporate drone programs. In such an environment, cost is not the issue. In the private sector and public at large, perhaps we've forgotten how to work together. The military sector seems to have constant cost overruns and occasional big failures but at least gets the job done. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Guidance_Computer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Guidance_Computer
- systemvoltage 4y ago
  Yup, most of the talent has left, retired or flat out moved off of the area of research. What I’m hopeful about is some new innovation happening in certain corners. Companies such as SpaceX, often made fun by people that are resentful as “Cowboys”, forget that the entire Apollo program was more “Cowboy” than anything SpaceX is doing today. Read “Failure is not an option” by Gene Kranz if anyone is interested in the old school Cowboy culture of NASA. Warning: It might make you an optimist.

contingencies 4y ago

Real progress requires largely-uninterrupted time, space and adequate resources, cannot be readily predicted and is inherently risky. By outsourcing higher thought to the private sector, progress without immediate commercial application has been grossly disincentivized and I would argue the prerequisite culture has been lost. A 15-bit computer[0] brought us to the moon, whereas this time awash with 64 bit mobile supercomputers, infinite RAM, search engines and cloud computing has brought us high profile failures in corporate drone programs. In such an environment, cost is not the issue. In the private sector and public at large, perhaps we've forgotten how to work together. The military sector seems to have constant cost overruns and occasional big failures but at least gets the job done. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Guidance_Computer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_Guidance_Computer

systemvoltage 4y ago
Yup, most of the talent has left, retired or flat out moved off of the area of research. What I’m hopeful about is some new innovation happening in certain corners. Companies such as SpaceX, often made fun by people that are resentful as “Cowboys”, forget that the entire Apollo program was more “Cowboy” than anything SpaceX is doing today. Read “Failure is not an option” by Gene Kranz if anyone is interested in the old school Cowboy culture of NASA. Warning: It might make you an optimist.