5 ms·

In the last day or so, I heard some researcher say on NPR that some of his postdocs now are accomplishing things that a decade ago would've taken a hundred scie

In the last day or so, I heard some researcher say on NPR that some of his postdocs now are accomplishing things that a decade ago would've taken a hundred scientists to do, and all thanks to recent rapid advances in technology. While I understand Thiel's arguments, how should we actually weigh these competing claims? Is it as simple as the notion that lots of people are trying to use technology to safely make big bucks with very minute changes in products whereas other folks might be making big advances in science without getting much press? Talk to me, I want to know!

spitx 14y ago
I think the low-cachet quotient society bestows on technology is the huge carcass no one wants to talk about. It is the real answer why we cannot get enough women early on in the STEM pipeline. It is the real answer why technology workers have not-very satisfying careers in the West. Society treats them as lepers here. Whereas in the rest of the world they are highly esteemed members of the society. We will still be talking about the low headcount of women in technology as long as its quite apparent that the likes of a sneaker maker like Isabel Marant or an editor like Anna Wintour are more esteemed in society than any living woman in any field that is remotely scientific or mathematical.
- hkmurakami 14y ago
  At least in the east, I saw technology workers have much less satisfying careers compared to their US counterparts.
- joshuagross 14y ago
  All the tech workers I know in the U.S. have very satisfying careers, but it depends on your metric and who you're talking to. Many of my Southeast Asian and Indian tech friends work hard to get to the U.S., and I don't see the reverse happening much.
ippisl 14y ago
While i don't generally buy into Thiel's arguments, There are many big barriers between great scientific discovery and massively deployed product: 1. Unneeded regulation. 2. Power structures in industry. 3. Complex and expensive commercialization processes. 4. Lack of funding, lack of long term funding. 5. Market acceptance. 6. Lack of entrepreneurial talent and general talent in the relevant field. In this context, small sustaining innovations tend to produced more than radical innovations.

spitx 14y ago

I think the low-cachet quotient society bestows on technology is the huge carcass no one wants to talk about. It is the real answer why we cannot get enough women early on in the STEM pipeline. It is the real answer why technology workers have not-very satisfying careers in the West. Society treats them as lepers here. Whereas in the rest of the world they are highly esteemed members of the society. We will still be talking about the low headcount of women in technology as long as its quite apparent that the likes of a sneaker maker like Isabel Marant or an editor like Anna Wintour are more esteemed in society than any living woman in any field that is remotely scientific or mathematical.

hkmurakami 14y ago
At least in the east, I saw technology workers have much less satisfying careers compared to their US counterparts.
joshuagross 14y ago
All the tech workers I know in the U.S. have very satisfying careers, but it depends on your metric and who you're talking to. Many of my Southeast Asian and Indian tech friends work hard to get to the U.S., and I don't see the reverse happening much.

ippisl 14y ago

While i don't generally buy into Thiel's arguments, There are many big barriers between great scientific discovery and massively deployed product: 1. Unneeded regulation. 2. Power structures in industry. 3. Complex and expensive commercialization processes. 4. Lack of funding, lack of long term funding. 5. Market acceptance. 6. Lack of entrepreneurial talent and general talent in the relevant field. In this context, small sustaining innovations tend to produced more than radical innovations.