4 ms·

Art? Yes, of course! I have no clue what you're referring to with tech, though. Throughout history development of tech has almost always driven by seeking econo

Art? Yes, of course! I have no clue what you're referring to with tech, though. Throughout history development of tech has almost always driven by seeking economic leverage. I'm sure there are exceptions but I can't think of any. Not sure what you're referring to with science at all.

musicale 3y ago
> Throughout history development of tech has almost always driven by seeking economic leverage. I'm sure there are exceptions but I can't think of any. What about: - curiosity (much of science, mathematics, etc.) - artistic expression (musical instruments, demoscene) - fortunate accidents (penicillin) - just tinkering around (all sorts of inventions) - play and fun (many non-commercial computer games) - communication (telegraph, telephone, email, ...) - self-expression (blogs) - being dissatisfied with something and trying to change it (many more inventions) - basic needs (advances in food, shelter, medicine...) - trying to gain a military advantage (all sorts of weaponry and defenses) - exploration (e.g. traveling to the bottom of the ocean, or landing on the moon) - ideology/philosophy/religion (GNU and free software; cathedrals; pyramids) etc. At the end of the day much of technology is motivated by human needs, interests, desires, fears, etc. OP's move from tech to comedy writing shows that interest or passion can be powerful motivators.
- breather 3y ago
  I'm as keen to wax poetic about the non-economic potential of technology as the next person, but I'm not deluding myself into thinking that was why the technology was developed in the first place. Also, a military advantage is an economic one, there's no real difference between the concepts.
  - wrs 3y ago
    So you’re saying all of technology is the result of saying “we could make money if we had a thing that did X”, and none of it is the result of “we found a way to do X because we thought it would be cool.” If nothing else, you just dismissed most of mathematics and basic physics.
latency-guy2 3y ago
I think you value "art" too much, and think too little of "tech". It's also not confusing to me what the other person is saying, maybe you can clarify what your misunderstandings are before anyone can address them.

musicale 3y ago

> Throughout history development of tech has almost always driven by seeking economic leverage. I'm sure there are exceptions but I can't think of any. What about: - curiosity (much of science, mathematics, etc.) - artistic expression (musical instruments, demoscene) - fortunate accidents (penicillin) - just tinkering around (all sorts of inventions) - play and fun (many non-commercial computer games) - communication (telegraph, telephone, email, ...) - self-expression (blogs) - being dissatisfied with something and trying to change it (many more inventions) - basic needs (advances in food, shelter, medicine...) - trying to gain a military advantage (all sorts of weaponry and defenses) - exploration (e.g. traveling to the bottom of the ocean, or landing on the moon) - ideology/philosophy/religion (GNU and free software; cathedrals; pyramids) etc. At the end of the day much of technology is motivated by human needs, interests, desires, fears, etc. OP's move from tech to comedy writing shows that interest or passion can be powerful motivators.

breather 3y ago
I'm as keen to wax poetic about the non-economic potential of technology as the next person, but I'm not deluding myself into thinking that was why the technology was developed in the first place. Also, a military advantage is an economic one, there's no real difference between the concepts.
- wrs 3y ago
  So you’re saying all of technology is the result of saying “we could make money if we had a thing that did X”, and none of it is the result of “we found a way to do X because we thought it would be cool.” If nothing else, you just dismissed most of mathematics and basic physics.

latency-guy2 3y ago

I think you value "art" too much, and think too little of "tech". It's also not confusing to me what the other person is saying, maybe you can clarify what your misunderstandings are before anyone can address them.