8 ms·

I hadn't thought of these individual achievements as being that big until I saw them all together in one place and now I can say that this has truly been a brea

I hadn't thought of these individual achievements as being that big until I saw them all together in one place and now I can say that this has truly been a breakthrough year all across the technology sector. Every year we seem to be accelerating our speed of development when it comes to technology, I'm only 19 and in my life I've seen us go from 56kb/s internet to 1gb/s internet, go from the rare NASA launch to regular private company launches (don't forget, SpaceX is not the only private company engaging in these kind of activities, there is also Virgin Galactic in the UK who are breaching the barriers facing them very quickly.) and medical breakthroughs across every sector. We live in the golden age of human history up to now and I would be willing to place a long bet that in 100 years, we will look back on the last 30 years as the dawn of the modern age.

dhimes 14y ago
I believe you are correct; the beauty of exponential growth is that at any point you can make the same observation about the previous 100 years.
- Retric 14y ago
  Exponential growth in some areas. I don't think peoples lifestyles have changed all that much in the last 30 years. In 1982 you could point to computers, networks, and cellphones and say these are going to get far more popular. But, medicine, car millage, and battery power while improved are not that much better. PS: What's so striking to me is how little science fiction has changed over that time span.
  - dhimes 14y ago
    Agree on sci-fi, but medical imaging has really been born in the last 30 years and may prove to be a game-changer in diagnosis and localized treatments over the next 70. Also, the invention of PCR techniques allow much better testing and drug development. So I think we'll look back 70 years from now and make the same claim about medicine.
    - deleted 14y ago
      [deleted]
    - Retric 14y ago
      MRI's is another 'old' tech, and PCR is barely inside that 30 year window as it was developed in 1983. In 1952, Herman Carr produced a one-dimensional MRI image as reported in his Harvard PhD thesis. Meanwhile, Paul Lauterbur expanded on Carr's technique and developed a way to generate the first MRI images, in 2D and 3D, using gradients. In 1973, Lauterbur published the first nuclear magnetic resonance image.[25][26] and the first cross-sectional image of a living mouse was published in January 1974. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_resonance_imaging http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_resonance_imaging Granted, improve things enough and you end up with qualitative differences. AKA wind power is near parity with coal which is a game changer.
      - dhimes 14y ago
        I don't disagree that the foundations of this technology were laid earlier than 30 years ago (NMR->MRI); there was, of course, even other medical imaging long before that (x-rays, PET, etc). I still think that in 70 years we're going to be able to look at this 30 year span and say it was 'game-changing.' And 100 years from today "we'll" (you maybe- I'd be 150 years old!) look at the years 2010-2040 at "game changing." Look at 1800-1830 from the point of view of 1900: steam engines. Anyway, it's fun to think about.
- dredmorbius 14y ago
  There were long periods of world history where growth and development were anything but exponential, and for significant periods were reversed. The period since the Italian Renaissance has been pretty spiffy though.
  - mtts 14y ago
    The period since the Italian Renaissance is actually more interesting than "pretty spiffy". While science improved by leaps and bounds, living conditions for ordinary people (in Europe) deteriorated quite significantly. Crop yields plummeted, leading to starvation, disease and decreasing populations all over Europe. Only in the 19th century did things improve again. The moral of the story being, I guess, that improvements in science and technology, do not necessarily go hand in hand with improvements in living standards.
    - dredmorbius 14y ago
      The foundations for the 19th Century improvements were established in the 14th century, and followed nearly ten centuries of stagnation and decline. The payoff wasn't instantaneous, but it was certainly cumulative. Exponential, one might almost say.
      - mtts 14y ago
        For the technical improvements, maybe, but for the improvements in living standards, not so much. Living standards for commoners improved (vastly) during the 15th century, as a result of depopulation due to the Black Death in the 14th and the increased negotiating power of commoners that caused. Improved farming methods helped as well. Unfortunately these improved living standards led to overpopulation and a subsequent decrease in living standards that only bottomed out during the late 17th century and that was exacerbated further by constant religious war and by climate change (the "little ice age"). Recovery was slow (partly because the "little ice age" lasted until the early 19th century) and only towards the end of that century do we find peasants better off than their 15th century forebears. The evidence for this is in archives all over Europe and has been extensively written about by people like Emmanuel Le Roy Ladury. While the rich and educated were busy improving science and conquering the world, the poor suffered.
pretoriusB 14y ago
>We live in the golden age of human history up to now and I would be willing to place a long bet that in 100 years, we will look back on the last 30 years as the dawn of the modern age. Well, we live in the golden age of human _technology_. But, I'd argue, far from the golden age of human history. And maybe closer than ever to the extinction of mankind, if that "let's fix the climate issue with even more technology and continue on the same 'development for development's sake' path continues. Not to mention crazy politicians with nuclear, biological and what have you weapons on their hands and a battle for global resources like oil and water...
- JanezStupar 14y ago
  Enlighten me then, when was golden age of human history then in your opinion? I have a problem with you new age romantics, bitching about issues of current civilization without providing alternatives or even realizing what "reversing" current state of affairs would really mean.
  - pretoriusB 14y ago
    >Enlighten me then, when was golden age of human history then in your opinion? Ever occurred to you that it might be in the future? Or that human history was perpetually in the same state of mess? Good for a few, a nightmare for others? Or that "good for humanity" and technological advancements are not necessarily the same thing, and that e.g living an agrarian life in some 18th century farm could be better for someone than living as an industrial worker in a highly modern Foxconn factory, despite increased odds of dying from a decease preventable today or having to get your water from the well? Damn, I'd take living in the sixties to living in the '00s any day of the week, despite having to let go of my iPad. >I have a problem with you new age romantics, bitching about issues of current civilization without providing alternatives or even realizing what "reversing" current state of affairs would really mean. When there's a problem, like a cancer, you need to remove the cancer. You don't need an "alternative" to it. Also, I'm not sure how to read the part about not realising what "reversing the current state of affairs would really mean". Who said anything about "reversing"? There's a lot we can do without reversing anything. Stoping the market craze is not the same as "reversing" progress or anything. Not to mention that progress != building more advanced things cheaper.
shawn-butler 14y ago
I think you should critically reevaluate your use of the word modern. We've already never been modern once before. Besides being a lot of fun, making up new words to describe historical trends both real and imagined can also be profitable.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
smegel 14y ago
In what way are virgin galactic in the UK?

dhimes 14y ago

I believe you are correct; the beauty of exponential growth is that at any point you can make the same observation about the previous 100 years.

Retric 14y ago
Exponential growth in some areas. I don't think peoples lifestyles have changed all that much in the last 30 years. In 1982 you could point to computers, networks, and cellphones and say these are going to get far more popular. But, medicine, car millage, and battery power while improved are not that much better. PS: What's so striking to me is how little science fiction has changed over that time span.
- dhimes 14y ago
  Agree on sci-fi, but medical imaging has really been born in the last 30 years and may prove to be a game-changer in diagnosis and localized treatments over the next 70. Also, the invention of PCR techniques allow much better testing and drug development. So I think we'll look back 70 years from now and make the same claim about medicine.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
  - Retric 14y ago
    MRI's is another 'old' tech, and PCR is barely inside that 30 year window as it was developed in 1983. In 1952, Herman Carr produced a one-dimensional MRI image as reported in his Harvard PhD thesis. Meanwhile, Paul Lauterbur expanded on Carr's technique and developed a way to generate the first MRI images, in 2D and 3D, using gradients. In 1973, Lauterbur published the first nuclear magnetic resonance image.[25][26] and the first cross-sectional image of a living mouse was published in January 1974. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_resonance_imaging http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_resonance_imaging Granted, improve things enough and you end up with qualitative differences. AKA wind power is near parity with coal which is a game changer.
    - dhimes 14y ago
      I don't disagree that the foundations of this technology were laid earlier than 30 years ago (NMR->MRI); there was, of course, even other medical imaging long before that (x-rays, PET, etc). I still think that in 70 years we're going to be able to look at this 30 year span and say it was 'game-changing.' And 100 years from today "we'll" (you maybe- I'd be 150 years old!) look at the years 2010-2040 at "game changing." Look at 1800-1830 from the point of view of 1900: steam engines. Anyway, it's fun to think about.
dredmorbius 14y ago
There were long periods of world history where growth and development were anything but exponential, and for significant periods were reversed. The period since the Italian Renaissance has been pretty spiffy though.
- mtts 14y ago
  The period since the Italian Renaissance is actually more interesting than "pretty spiffy". While science improved by leaps and bounds, living conditions for ordinary people (in Europe) deteriorated quite significantly. Crop yields plummeted, leading to starvation, disease and decreasing populations all over Europe. Only in the 19th century did things improve again. The moral of the story being, I guess, that improvements in science and technology, do not necessarily go hand in hand with improvements in living standards.
  - dredmorbius 14y ago
    The foundations for the 19th Century improvements were established in the 14th century, and followed nearly ten centuries of stagnation and decline. The payoff wasn't instantaneous, but it was certainly cumulative. Exponential, one might almost say.
    - mtts 14y ago
      For the technical improvements, maybe, but for the improvements in living standards, not so much. Living standards for commoners improved (vastly) during the 15th century, as a result of depopulation due to the Black Death in the 14th and the increased negotiating power of commoners that caused. Improved farming methods helped as well. Unfortunately these improved living standards led to overpopulation and a subsequent decrease in living standards that only bottomed out during the late 17th century and that was exacerbated further by constant religious war and by climate change (the "little ice age"). Recovery was slow (partly because the "little ice age" lasted until the early 19th century) and only towards the end of that century do we find peasants better off than their 15th century forebears. The evidence for this is in archives all over Europe and has been extensively written about by people like Emmanuel Le Roy Ladury. While the rich and educated were busy improving science and conquering the world, the poor suffered.

pretoriusB 14y ago

>We live in the golden age of human history up to now and I would be willing to place a long bet that in 100 years, we will look back on the last 30 years as the dawn of the modern age. Well, we live in the golden age of human _technology_. But, I'd argue, far from the golden age of human history. And maybe closer than ever to the extinction of mankind, if that "let's fix the climate issue with even more technology and continue on the same 'development for development's sake' path continues. Not to mention crazy politicians with nuclear, biological and what have you weapons on their hands and a battle for global resources like oil and water...

JanezStupar 14y ago
Enlighten me then, when was golden age of human history then in your opinion? I have a problem with you new age romantics, bitching about issues of current civilization without providing alternatives or even realizing what "reversing" current state of affairs would really mean.
- pretoriusB 14y ago
  >Enlighten me then, when was golden age of human history then in your opinion? Ever occurred to you that it might be in the future? Or that human history was perpetually in the same state of mess? Good for a few, a nightmare for others? Or that "good for humanity" and technological advancements are not necessarily the same thing, and that e.g living an agrarian life in some 18th century farm could be better for someone than living as an industrial worker in a highly modern Foxconn factory, despite increased odds of dying from a decease preventable today or having to get your water from the well? Damn, I'd take living in the sixties to living in the '00s any day of the week, despite having to let go of my iPad. >I have a problem with you new age romantics, bitching about issues of current civilization without providing alternatives or even realizing what "reversing" current state of affairs would really mean. When there's a problem, like a cancer, you need to remove the cancer. You don't need an "alternative" to it. Also, I'm not sure how to read the part about not realising what "reversing the current state of affairs would really mean". Who said anything about "reversing"? There's a lot we can do without reversing anything. Stoping the market craze is not the same as "reversing" progress or anything. Not to mention that progress != building more advanced things cheaper.

shawn-butler 14y ago

I think you should critically reevaluate your use of the word modern. We've already never been modern once before. Besides being a lot of fun, making up new words to describe historical trends both real and imagined can also be profitable.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

smegel 14y ago

In what way are virgin galactic in the UK?