I love old sci-fi
-
This post did not contain any content.
But their computers are still the size of a room and everyone smokes
-
This post did not contain any content.
Technology had been advancing at a breakneck pace for over a century. It’s not crazy for them to think that would keep happening.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Looks like they’re exploring the Pyrenees.
-
This post did not contain any content.
They didn’t expect bigotry to basically hold us hostage for 100+ years.
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote last edited by [email protected]
In my teens, the year 2000 was unreal.
It embodied THE FUTURE - it was so far away.Edit: centuries even.
-
Technology had been advancing at a breakneck pace for over a century. It’s not crazy for them to think that would keep happening.
Isn’t it though? Each age has had its technological advance that defines that age. But at no time did the next age come immediately. It was always reasonable to assume that after electricity there would be yet another lull before the next paradigm shifting innovation. It seems to me that the great lie of capitalism has been convincing people that every new product is that next great innovation.
-
Isn’t it though? Each age has had its technological advance that defines that age. But at no time did the next age come immediately. It was always reasonable to assume that after electricity there would be yet another lull before the next paradigm shifting innovation. It seems to me that the great lie of capitalism has been convincing people that every new product is that next great innovation.
Steam power gave way almost immediately to electricity, which gave way to nuclear technologies, which gave way to information technology, all building on what came before.
And then there’s all the various transportation technologies that happened at the same time. Going from the first flight to the Moon in under 70 years it’s no wonder, to me at least, that people thought we’d be on Mars by now.
Especially with Walt Disney putting a Nazi rocket scientist on TV a bunch of times.
-
This post did not contain any content.
The industrial and technological revolutions were a cause of radical change in human civilization. It was inspiring to think we would continue to grow instead of monetizing every last vestige of this world and our psyches?!
-
But their computers are still the size of a room and everyone smokes
You jest! Asimov’s computers are the size of planets.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Radiant indeed, but then Chernobyl happened and we got a lot more cautious about nuclear power. Also about trusting other countries. Well, we didn't trust them before but that coverup didn't help.
-
Steam power gave way almost immediately to electricity, which gave way to nuclear technologies, which gave way to information technology, all building on what came before.
And then there’s all the various transportation technologies that happened at the same time. Going from the first flight to the Moon in under 70 years it’s no wonder, to me at least, that people thought we’d be on Mars by now.
Especially with Walt Disney putting a Nazi rocket scientist on TV a bunch of times.
… all building on what came before.
That was my point though. Metallurgy gave way to cannons and guns but we don’t have a “cannons and guns” age. Everything is iterative but occasionally we have something come along that changes everything and starts the iterations anew. But that has never continued after, just been followed by more iteration.
Also, it took over 1000 years to get from the first steam experiments to a useful engine.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I watched the first Moon Landing on our neighbors' TV. I was so disappointed because I'd been reading my Dad's and big brother's Asimov Magazines since I was six, and I couldn't believe our real technology was so primitive.
-
… all building on what came before.
That was my point though. Metallurgy gave way to cannons and guns but we don’t have a “cannons and guns” age. Everything is iterative but occasionally we have something come along that changes everything and starts the iterations anew. But that has never continued after, just been followed by more iteration.
Also, it took over 1000 years to get from the first steam experiments to a useful engine.
I mean, we do have a cannons and guns age.
I agree that it’s been iteration, but the pace of iterations seems to be slowing down. Since the Internet was invented there hasn’t been a game-changing technology created.
Lots of things that claim to be it - Bitcoin, metaverse, now AI - but nothing like what we saw in the 19th and 20th centuries.
And I think that’s because huge population growth and a relatively unknown world led to huge advances very quickly. Now to make similar advances you can’t be a polymath like Newton or Tesla. You need huge investments.
Case in point: Physics. A lot of the fundamental physics from the 19th and 20th centuries can be re-created with simple materials and a little expertise. People can replicate the double slit experiment with a $2 laser pointer and a piece of foil.
But to make new advances in physics you need particle accelerators and supercomputers, and many highly educated people working together.
-
Radiant indeed, but then Chernobyl happened and we got a lot more cautious about nuclear power. Also about trusting other countries. Well, we didn't trust them before but that coverup didn't help.
Three Mile Island was a near melt down years before Chernobyl.
-
This post did not contain any content.
One of my favourites.
-
This post did not contain any content.
It's the future we could have had; if line didn't have to go up.
-
I mean, we do have a cannons and guns age.
I agree that it’s been iteration, but the pace of iterations seems to be slowing down. Since the Internet was invented there hasn’t been a game-changing technology created.
Lots of things that claim to be it - Bitcoin, metaverse, now AI - but nothing like what we saw in the 19th and 20th centuries.
And I think that’s because huge population growth and a relatively unknown world led to huge advances very quickly. Now to make similar advances you can’t be a polymath like Newton or Tesla. You need huge investments.
Case in point: Physics. A lot of the fundamental physics from the 19th and 20th centuries can be re-created with simple materials and a little expertise. People can replicate the double slit experiment with a $2 laser pointer and a piece of foil.
But to make new advances in physics you need particle accelerators and supercomputers, and many highly educated people working together.
I’m not sure if we are talking past each other this point or what, but take the Internet since you mentioned it;
Let’s compare to transistors for instance. You could have (and did have) the internet without transistors and you could have transistors without the internet. Nobody would argue that either are not massively impactful inventions but neither would exist without electricity. Electricity is the paradigm shifting breakthrough. In the same way neither cannons nor guns were the breakthrough themselves.
…but the pace of iterations seems to be slowing down.
I thought that was the whole conversation we were having. My main point was not only that innovation is slowing down but that we should expect it to slow based on the trajectory of previous paradigm shifting breakthroughs.
-
This post did not contain any content.
I read a ton of Andre Norton in my youth
-
I’m not sure if we are talking past each other this point or what, but take the Internet since you mentioned it;
Let’s compare to transistors for instance. You could have (and did have) the internet without transistors and you could have transistors without the internet. Nobody would argue that either are not massively impactful inventions but neither would exist without electricity. Electricity is the paradigm shifting breakthrough. In the same way neither cannons nor guns were the breakthrough themselves.
…but the pace of iterations seems to be slowing down.
I thought that was the whole conversation we were having. My main point was not only that innovation is slowing down but that we should expect it to slow based on the trajectory of previous paradigm shifting breakthroughs.
I think we are, but by your logic the real breakthrough was fire, because without that we wouldn’t have electricity.
-
But their computers are still the size of a room and everyone smokes
Their computers have AGI already. Our computers consume more energy than entire countries to make studio Ghibli fakes and autocomplete on steroids.
