"Smaller new tools emerge around the fringe of the market every day." Isn't that how all new tools emerge? I'm not going to disagree with the main premise whi

"Smaller new tools emerge around the fringe of the market every day." Isn't that how all new tools emerge? I'm not going to disagree with the main premise which is that real innovation on the scale of the invention of the transistor are slowing significantly. Judy Estrin's book details this trend painfully, and lays down good evidence that it started around the 80s. That said, I think it's useful us for to pin down what revolutionary "new tools" are, and where they come from, yes? I feel that this is an important nitpick because it is hard to say where "new tools" come from. They do certainly seem to loosely and randomly come from academia (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistor, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_molecular_biology http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_molecular_biology) and sometimes from tinkering (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile). However, these advances were always on the fringes. What will the next jump be? Quantum computing maybe? It seems neglected and pushed to the fringes now so it's quite possible that that will indeed be it. After all, it seems that it's hard for people to seriously innovate in the limelight.