3 ms·

Inventor status is a bit murky: https://farnovision.com/wp/no-iconoscope-in-1923/ https://farnovision.com/wp/no-iconoscope-in-1923/

gcanyon 9mo ago
The interesting question (to me) is how directly a line can be drawn from the original invention to what we in modern times think of as “the thing”? As an example, the Wright brothers built a biplane that had wing warping instead of ailerons and a canard design. That bears little resemblance to most modern airplanes, but people have little trouble crediting it as “the invention of the airplane” —- questions of whether the Wrights were first or not notwithstanding. Can ”TV” be thus simplified so that an electromechanical device with spinning discs qualifies?
- WalterBright 9mo ago
  The invention of the "airplane" is just a simplified term for "controlled and sustained powered flight". Which the Wrights did with both controlled and powered in the 1903 Flyer. (The Wrights invented the first 3-axis control system, and designed & built the first aviation engine capable of sustained flight.) While the Wrights were first, by several years, its invention was inevitable.
  - gcanyon 9mo ago
    > The invention of the "airplane" is just a simplified term for "controlled and sustained powered flight" Maybe? But most people think of it as "invented the airplane," and the two terms have different connotations in common use. Likewise, the title here says "television," not "real-time capture, transmission, and display of moving images" -- and similarly, I think the terms have different connotations.
    - WalterBright 9mo ago
      People who do not have a technical education tend to have a less precise definition of things. There's not a great deal of point to arguing semantics. There were precursors to Edison's light bulb, and people use that to denigrate Edison's achievement. But the technical reality of the Edison bulb is his bulb was practical, and the precursors were just curiosities.
      - gcanyon 9mo ago
        > Edison Sure, and (as far as I know) Edison's basic pattern at discovery was much the same as what we use today (less so these days obviously): 1. Fill a sealed container with non-reactive gas or vacuum 2. String something conductive and heat-tolerant through it 3. Run enough current through it to make the thing glow I think the same can be said for the Wright brothers -- perhaps less so for the reasons I gave previously. I think a system that involves mechanical elements is farther from what most people think of when they think "TV"

gcanyon 9mo ago

The interesting question (to me) is how directly a line can be drawn from the original invention to what we in modern times think of as “the thing”? As an example, the Wright brothers built a biplane that had wing warping instead of ailerons and a canard design. That bears little resemblance to most modern airplanes, but people have little trouble crediting it as “the invention of the airplane” —- questions of whether the Wrights were first or not notwithstanding. Can ”TV” be thus simplified so that an electromechanical device with spinning discs qualifies?

WalterBright 9mo ago
The invention of the "airplane" is just a simplified term for "controlled and sustained powered flight". Which the Wrights did with both controlled and powered in the 1903 Flyer. (The Wrights invented the first 3-axis control system, and designed & built the first aviation engine capable of sustained flight.) While the Wrights were first, by several years, its invention was inevitable.
- gcanyon 9mo ago
  > The invention of the "airplane" is just a simplified term for "controlled and sustained powered flight" Maybe? But most people think of it as "invented the airplane," and the two terms have different connotations in common use. Likewise, the title here says "television," not "real-time capture, transmission, and display of moving images" -- and similarly, I think the terms have different connotations.
  - WalterBright 9mo ago
    People who do not have a technical education tend to have a less precise definition of things. There's not a great deal of point to arguing semantics. There were precursors to Edison's light bulb, and people use that to denigrate Edison's achievement. But the technical reality of the Edison bulb is his bulb was practical, and the precursors were just curiosities.
    - gcanyon 9mo ago
      > Edison Sure, and (as far as I know) Edison's basic pattern at discovery was much the same as what we use today (less so these days obviously): 1. Fill a sealed container with non-reactive gas or vacuum 2. String something conductive and heat-tolerant through it 3. Run enough current through it to make the thing glow I think the same can be said for the Wright brothers -- perhaps less so for the reasons I gave previously. I think a system that involves mechanical elements is farther from what most people think of when they think "TV"