When Will This Low-Innovation Era End? | Hacker News Reader

When Will This Low-Innovation Era End?

blog-admin.wired.com

39 pointsjnbiche51 comments

The issue is not innovation, per se. the Issue is more like "progress" or improved lifestyles, culture, families, etc. The critique of the past 10 years is that there has been plenty of <empty> innovation. Lifestyles are "worse", despite more stuff. People are living in the same houses, but they are 3x as expensive. The mobile phone was very useful, but the crackberry/iphone has become more of a ball and chain, than a tool of freedom. The internet has turned into a giant blinking neon light, meant to be stared at, so our attention can be "leveraged" by advertsisers. Every thing that is meant to be an improvement ("contextual, personalized content") has an orwellian alternative case (GPS Tracking, DeepPacketInspection, rogue cookies). So the issue is not "innovation" per se. It's innovation on the upside. Innovation that is absent the downsides. Much (if not most) of the innovation in the past 10 years has been on these downsides. Thus, the things that are better (ipods, retina displays, amazing batteries,macbook air, dslr, etc) are sort of bitter sweet. [Flamesuit Donned!]

Just because there is a lot of attention paid to the instagrams of the world does not mean there is nobody tackling big problems.

Then the internet happened and everything got put on hold for a generation.”

The ability for everyday man to broadcast is as big a revolution as the printing press.

Typed from my glowing sheet of glass, from my couch, to be shared with the world.

> The ability for everyday man to broadcast is as big a revolution as the printing press.

In the words of Jason Scott:

> It is not unreasonable to say that a person putting up a web page might have a farther reach and greater potential audience than anyone in the history of their genetic line.

http://ascii.textfiles.com/archives/2402

The article just doesn't apply for the developing world. The China, and India of 1990 was completely different from what it is today.

Speaking from experience, 20 years ago most people in India did not have a phone and it was impossible to get a home phone without string-pulling and bribery. Now 50% of the population has a mobile phone; no bribes. 30 years ago, Sugar was rationed and you could buy a 1 kg of Sugar for a household per month. Now, there is plentiful Sugar.

Things that Developed countries take for granted - Fridges, Washing Machines, Microwaves, Dining tables, TVs, personal transport (cars, motorcycles), better access to health care, better access to education, simply did not exist or was out of reach for most. I'm not saying that they are now available to everyone, but the reach has expanded.

20 years the politicians made promises that Rice would be available at low rates, now they make promises that TVs would be available at low rates.

If that's not a revolution, I wonder what is. Heck even electricity is still a luxury in India.

This is utter bullshit. Warren Ellis's excelent "How to see the future"[1], addresses why we're perpetually bored by the times we live in, and are always nostalgic about some bygone golden age:

    ...We look at the present day through a rear-view mirror. 
    This is something Marshall McLuhan said back in the 
    Sixties, when the world was in the grip of authentic-
    seeming future narratives. He said, “We look at the 
    present through a rear-view mirror. We march backwards 
    into the future.”

    He went on to say this, in 1969, the year of the crewed 
    Moon landing: “Because of the invisibility of any 
    environment during the period of its innovation, man is 
    only consciously aware of the environment that has 
    preceded it; in other words, an environment becomes fully
    visible only when it has been superseded by a new 
    environment; thus we are always one step behind in our 
    view of the world. The present is always invisible because 
    it’s environmental and saturates the whole field of 
    attention so overwhelmingly; thus everyone is alive in an 
    earlier day.”

He goes on to cite some examples of stuff that seems banal and boring because we're just so used to it:

    There are six people living in space right now. There are
    people printing prototypes of human organs, and people 
    printing nanowire tissue that will bond with human flesh
    and the human electrical system.

    We’ve photographed the shadow of a single atom. We’ve got
    robot legs controlled by brainwaves. Explorers have just
    stood in the deepest unsubmerged place in the world, a
    cave more than two kilometres under Abkhazia. NASA are
    getting ready to launch three satellites the size of
    coffee mugs, that will be controllable by mobile phone
    apps.

    Here’s another angle on vintage space: Voyager 1 is more
    than 11 billion miles away, and it’s run off 64K of
    computing power and an eight-track tape deck.

    In the last ten years, we’ve discovered two previously
    unknown species of human. We can film eruptions on the
    surface of the sun, landings on Mars and even landings on
    Titan. Is all of this very boring to you? Because all this
    is happening right now, in this moment. Check the time on
    your phone, because this is the present time and these
    things are happening. The most basic mobile phone is in
    fact a communications devices that shames all of science
    fiction, all the wrist radios and handheld communicators.
    Captain Kirk had to tune his fucking communicator and it
    couldn’t text or take a photo that he could stick a nice
    Polaroid filter on. Science fiction didn’t see the mobile
    phone coming. It certainly didn’t see the glowing glass
    windows many of us carry now, where we make amazing things
    happen by pointing at it with our fingers like goddamn
    wizards.

    That, by the way, is what Steve Jobs meant when he said     
    that iPads were magical. The central metaphor is magic. 
    And perhaps magic seems an odd thing to bring up here, but 
    magic and fiction are deeply entangled, and you are all 
    now present at a séance for the future. We are summoning 
    it into the present. It’s here right now. It’s in the room 
    with us. We live in the future. We live in the Science 
    Fiction Condition, where we can see under atoms and across 
    the world and across the methane lakes of Titan.

[1] http://www.warrenellis.com/?p=14314&utm_source=buffer...

Was going to add a rebuttal to the linked article but no need :-) I really liked Warren Ellis' take on it.

That's exactly how I feel whenever I look at my tablet. It's a piece of glass that does things! If that isn't magic, I don't know what is.

Or, in short, when familiarity stops breeding contempt. Don't hold your breath.

The point is that the difference between 1900 and 1960 is fundamental on every level.

Carriages -> Cars

Land Travel -> Aerospace

Iceboxes at best -> Modern refrigeration

Pen and Paper -> Computers

Newspapers -> Ubiquitous electronic media.

Living at the mercy of infectious diseases -> Antibiotics/vaccines.

Coal (at best) -> Nuclear

Outhouses -> Modern Plumbing and sanitation

Etc. You could make similarly great comparisons between 1840-1900.

What do we have now? Looking at atoms? WTF does that matter in any practical sense? And even if you want to get sciency, it's clear that 1900-1960 was when the big changes in physics occurred, at least since Newton.

All of the big practical changes since 1960 have mainly served to isolate us, as amusing as they might be.

| Pen and Paper -> Computers

Computers existed in 1960, but they didn't replace pen and paper (and electric typewriters) until the 1990s.

| Newspapers -> Ubiquitous electronic media.

This obviously happened after 1960. I do not consider TV and radio in 1960 to be functionally the same as the internet.

| Coal (at best) -> Nuclear

The first commercial nuclear point plant in the US was in 1958, and had a very primitive design. Nuclear power as we know it came about after 1960.

| What do we have now?

Several of the things you mentioned as coming before 1960, for a start.

If we accept the point that were just in the middle of the transition , and look a little bit forward, we'll see:

1960 -> 2025

Air travel -> life quality telepresence and group meetings globally

Expensive education -> free, high quality education for all

Antibiotics are great(but easy) -> tons of very difficult medical innovations(transplants,printing organs,cancer treatments,diagnostics, AI in medicine ...)

Everything needs workers -> So much can be done automatically, at extremely cheaper cost and extremely rapid pace.

Dirty energy -> Clean energy at competitive price(at least available if not deployed)

Manual cars -> automated cars (?)

We love lucy -> Extreme variety of content

Monopoly -> addictive digital experiences

It's easy to see big changes when you look over 60 years.

In the future people will look back at comments like this and wonder how we could be so blind. But that's because what will be obvious to them is not so obvious to us. We are immersed in our history, we are distracted by flashy short-term trends and comparatively blind to subtle, long-term trends. Partly because we lack the foresight to see which trends will win out in the long run.

However, let's look at how the very nature of the world has changed in the last half century and how that might play out over the next few decades.

Let's look at the developed world. 50 years ago that was pretty much just the US/Canada and Western Europe, with smatterings of incomplete industrialization elsewhere. Today Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, and South Korea are unarguably developed, first world nations. And the coastal parts of China as well as Chile, Brazil, and several other countries are well on their way to that status and will join it within the next decade or two.

Meanwhile, war is becoming less common, and average quality of life as well as longevity is, overall, increasing everywhere in the entire world. This is an unprecedented event in human history, we are becoming more peaceful, wealthier, and healthier. And not just a small elite portion of the world, all of it (see Hans Rosling's TED talk for more on that).

Let's look at trade. In 1960 trade was remarkably limited. The world population was about 3 billion, gross world product was about 7 trillion USD (compared to 70 trillion today). In between the world grew by about 2x and got about 10x richer. Part of this is due to the invention of containerized shipping, which brought about a revolution in international shipping, increasing shipping tonnage by an order of magnitude or more. Today the total value of goods being transported internationally on the oceans is twice the value of the entire world economy in 1960.

Let's look at communications. Even in, say, 1980 the world was still a relatively disconnected place. Most people on Earth had never made a single phone call, and news of the world was still hard to come by. Today the world is knit together by a world-spanning instantaneous communications network, and the power of communication has been put into the hands of the world's population. It is not unusual nor terribly expensive to carry on a conversation in real-time with a person across the world, not just in the "1st world" but in the "3rd world" as well. News from all parts of the world now comes in the form of first hand reports and cell phone videos as much as it does from reporters repeating accounts from interviewed locals.

And that revolution in communications that has largely taken root only in the last decade has had a transformative effect on the world, and on geopolitics. Look at the revolutions of late, how quickly they spread, how they are still spreading, and how much they have overturned about the way we thought the world worked. The geopolitical landscape of 2015 will be unrecognizable from the perspective of 2005, and much of that is due to communication technology.

Let's look at business. In the US there has been an explosion of entrepreneurship on a massive scale. Many of the largest and most influential companies of today (Apple, Google, Microsoft, Amazon, etc.) were created not just within the last half century but even within the last 30 or 20 years. And new companies are sprouting up all the time (such as facebook). Meanwhile, a great many people are acquiring the capability to work for themselves on their own projects. The internet has made it that much easier for people to run their own businesses. Musical artists have found out how to be successful without signing on to a major label. Webcomic artists have discovered how to make a living without working through the syndication companies or being employees of large comic book corporations. Craftspeople have discovered how to sell their wares directly to the public through etsy or ebay or their own websites. And so many folks of many varying talents have taken their careers on a sharp detour via crowd-funding systems such as kickstarter. Already hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars are flowing through this new economy of self-made businesses, and it's growing at a fantastic pace. How fundamentally will this change the economy? In the next 20 years will it be more common for people to be their own boss and work as independent contractors than to be employees of a large corporation?

Let's look at medicine. AIDS was discovered in the 1980s. Throughout all of human history the only effective "treatment" for a lethal virus has been a vaccine, and yet scientists managed to develop effective treatments for AIDS within a matter of years. And today AIDS can be treated as a chronic illness. And too our understanding of biology and biochemistry has exploded. We've decoded the genome of not just homo sapiens but many other species and we've only just begun to understand biology on that level. But we've been able to experiment with amazing things, lab-grown organ replacements, genetic therapy, etc. Today someone with insulin dependent diabetes can buy actual, human insulin for a very affordable price. And this is because the gene to produce that insulin has been taken from humans and placed into bacteria which are then grown in vats and the insulin is extracted and purified. This is an amazing, futuristic achievement, and yet it is bog standard ordinary for today's world.

Let's look at technology and manufacturing. Computing power, of course, has exploded, and it will continue to do so as we develop new technologies like memristors and other breakthrough ideas. Manufacturing is in the midst of a sea change, as computer powered CNC machine tools, 3D printing, and much more are paving the way toward vastly accelerated cycles of development (whereby the time-frame between coming up with an idea and seeing that idea borne out in mass-production manufacturing has been shortened to a matter of weeks if not days, in the near future that will be measured in a matter of hours or minutes). And that will pave the way for fully automated manufacturing and fully configurable manufacturing. Imagine if anyone could visit a website, fill in a form, upload a few 3D models, pay a modest sum of money and have a bulk shipment of manufactured goods that were defined by that data (say, laptops, or smartphones, or bicycles, or automobiles) loaded onto a boat in a matter of days. What happens when a company with, say, 5 employees can build iPhones of the same quality and in sufficient volume to challenge Apple? What happens to the undeveloped world when we can make factories that run on solar power and bulk materials and output industrial goods (like tractors, cars, refrigerators, power stations, and water purification equipment), or when factories can produce factories themselves?

The world is a much different place than it was a half century ago, and it is on track to become an astoundingly different place than we can scarcely imagine. And the roots have been planted right here, right now.

P.S. Also, a tremendous amount of social change has happened in the last 50 years, both in the US and in the world. Much of that was enabled or assisted by technological change. It's easy to miss this because when comparing across time we tend to compare like with like, however we should remember that the lives we are comparing to in the 1960s aren't necessarily average lives, they are probably elite lives (e.g. straight christian white males with high-paying jobs).

"In the future people will look back at comments like this and wonder how we could be so blind."

Are you trying to suggest people are going to look back on your comment and wonder how you were so blind? I'm kind of wondering that right now.

35 days ago, you said that we need to focus on constructive comments.

I think it's obvious what "this" I was referring too. However, I do include myself and my post in that comment (which is why I said "we"). I have pointed out some ways in which our world is changing and has changed, but I certainly can't predict the future. Looking back from the perspective of the year 2040 there will no doubt be many trends that in retrospect are blindingly obvious but are not apparent to me.

That's was quite surreal to read. Thanks for taking your time to share such a nerve-rattling history of advancements in science and technology. I will probably print it out and frame it on my wall and remind myself that we are already living in the future even though much remains to be seen and accomplished.

Also, is your perspective in this topic synonymous with the law of accelerating change? http://www.kurzweilai.net/the-law-of-accelerating-returns

Isn't that a result of relative stagnation in the 1800's? When things like better microscopes, advanced plumbing, higher speed trains, electricity, phone, radio and other staples of today's world were just being researched and used by a handful of people (with the others wondering why tf does it matter).

Right now, we're paving the way for much more powerful computers (quantum & "living" computers, HUD glasses), cheaper space travel (via privatization of space travel), effective transportation (electric cars, efficient airplanes), medicine (stem cells, man-machine interfaces), energy (nuclear fusion, efficient batteries) production (3D printers, robotics, faster prototyping and research), and other stuff.

And just like the radio, it will be at least another 50 years before we actually use it all on a larger scale, in my opinion...

Stagnation in the 1800's? Keep in mind this was the century that saw the invention and spread of the railroad, the invention and spread of a nearly instant global communication medium with the telegraph, the telephone, the moving picture, photography, the typewriter, large-scale mechanized factories with the spread of steam power, etc.

To me, it feels that it's the everyday life that isn't changing much.

* I got my first computer 16 years ago

* I bought my first mobile phone 9 years ago

* I drive a car that is 18 years old

* I still shop in physical stores

Today :

* I can surf on 20 different websites at the same time as downloading a movie in 1080p

* I can search wikipedia from my phone

* I can have a car that parks itself

* I can shop for some things on the internet

But these aren't revolutions. I like what I got now and wouldn't trade it for what I had 10 years ago, but it hadn't changed my life much. They are improvements that I've come to like. I feel that with so much knowledge and some much technology a real revolution should come faster. I'm not nostalgic, I'm impatient.

Everyday I face problems that I've never solved before. I can query a nearly complete repository of human knowledge and find solutions nearly instantly.[1]

When I'm exploring a new city I have satellite maps of the entire world tied to a searchable index of millions of places, all on a device that fits in my pocket and is more powerful than as a supercomputer was 25 years ago[2].

There's an electric c on the market that rivals gas powered vehicles from Mercedes, BMW, and Porsche in luxury, power, and price. [3]

I'm plugged into a network that can notify me in advance of an earthquake that's going to reach me.[4]

Cars that drive themselves have been approved as street legal vehicles in several states.[5]

[1] http://bit.ly/Qs14ZG

[2] http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/04/mark-hurd-is-still-...

[3] http://www.teslamotors.com/models

[4] http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/earthquake-twitter-use...

[5] http://www.forbes.com/sites/singularity/2012/09/06/self-driv...

There's so many to add to the list, but nothing feels like a revolution to me. Do you feel they changed your life, I mean really changed your life ?

Ansolutely! I used to carry a Thomas Brothers guide to San Diego in my car. When I got lost it would take me 5 minutes just to figure out where the hell I was. The first time I drove to LA for my college orientation I had a map of California but not one of LA, and I got lost driving back from Westwood to UCLA and ended up in the middle of bel air. Today, it's hard to even remember that frustration.

The other day I was stumbling my way through configuring a server and thinking to myself: "how the hell did anyone ever accomplish anything before Google?".

Self driving cars undoubtedly will once they become publicly available, which seems inevitable.

Here's a list of a few things I might do on an average day that I couldn't do when I was in high school.

* Call home from the grocery store to ask if we're out of Provolone.

* Check my shopping list and see that items have been added to it since I left the house.

* Find a new restaurant with good reviews and make a reservation in mere minutes.

* Take pictures that rival 35mm film and make them available to friends in minutes (with me, it's usually hours or more, but it could be minutes).

* Find my way home from a random location without asking for directions in a gas station.

* Carry weeks worth of music and years worth of reading in my pocket.

* Order a new coffee maker online and expect it the next day.

* Buy a movie online and watch it instantly.

* Get answers to random medical questions.

* Find documentation for damned near anything.

* Work from home with access to everything I would have at the office.

Yes, many of these are indeed life changing. Could I live without these things? Absolutely, but I could also live without cars, and without air conditioning, and without a lot of things that were revolutionary. Electricity, indoor plumbing, and wired telephones took decades to make their way into average people's homes. If anything, the "digital age" is permeating lives faster and more broadly than the major changes that preceded it.

"Science Fiction Condition". What an incredible way of putting it. Thanks for the link!

Life now is clearly better and more interesting than it was 100 years ago. But the pace of innovation is much, much slower. 100 years ago cars, household electricity and recorded sound were all brand new. Every one of these things represents a huge leap forward, giving mankind entirely new capabilities. And all of them were developed and brought to market in the same 20-30 year period.

What have we produced in the last 20-30 years that's even close to providing that kind of new capability? The only recent innovation on that level is TCP/IP, and we've been iterating on that ever since.

"Things are good now" is never a reason to not get better. We've gotten very good at making incremental improvements, but fallen way behind on the pace of breakthrough innovation.

Wireless global communications for the masses is an enormous leap forward.

Cars and planes let me easily move 1500 miles away from where I grew up. And then modern communication technology and video/audio compression lets me communicate, with video, in real time with people back there, from anywhere I go with phone coverage. That's pretty damn significant.

The author of the original article is basically also assuming that none of the interesting things that are currently being researched are going to amount to anything. It's a bizarre mix of sampling problems, observational biases, and cynicism.

Edit: I thought of another pretty huge one: imaging, especially medically (look at how much less invasive many surgical procedures are now than they were 30 years ago), but also for stuff like mapping. We now have collections of images taken from airplanes and satellites of most (all?) of the world. When has that kind of information ever been available in the past? What kind of cool stuff will we be able to do in the next twenty years with all this information that has only seen widespread availability in the last ten years or so?

And then there are the medical procedures that weren't even possible thirty years ago...

I love how people talk about stagnation and then check the stock prices on their phones.

Nobody cares at all about mobile phones today; we take for granted that the smart phones are simply the yuppie upgrade for the RAZR or whatever.

But they are still causing the most dramatic and unprecedented shift society has ever seen, no questions about it.

Watch an old Star Trek episode. The main piece of technology isn't the ship, it's the transponders.

tl;dr: look in your pocket before you spray the internet with small minded thinking.

Let's not confuse lack of visibility with absence. Most engineering these days happens at invisible scales. An old railroad bridge might look impressive, but the cell phone tower next door is actually a much more complex structure. (You'd have to look at it with a microscope and a debugger, though.)

We are absolutely about to see it all pay off.

Let's not discount universal access to information, first of all. I'm 28 and when I was in high school 10 years ago, it was right about the time you could now find the quadratic formula by searching the Web, but before you could Google how to write a resume, find a good doctor in your area, or read blogs about developing better study habits. I think the world must have been a little darker before the Google age.

Then there's universal distribution of software (the web, mobile devices) and the relative ease of developing niche apps today. The transformation of the world by (good) software is just beginning.

I think this is sort of a 80/20 situation, where the last 20% of the project is taking 80% of the time to complete -- the project here being the "migration" from the physical to the digital world. That's why change is not so palpable. This project is a great one nonetheless: we're redefining how humans relate to each other, how we handle and share knowledge, how we collaborate. I think these changes affect society in a more profound way than some great new device or technology.

I honestly think that this line of thinking is now outdated. There will be a mental revolution for those who believe in this, because the rest of the world believes we are already in a revolution.. Stop being negative, make room for the people who are ready to innovate. Quit hating, in less words. There are generations who are adapting to this new environment, even if they don't realize it.

I'd say this: stop focusing on the negative and start being creative-- this article is just a bunch of bullshit excuses that will in itself slow innovation. Feed the hungry, don't kick them when they are down. "We" young entrepreneurs need inspiration now more than anything, not criticism. Big ideas are going to happen, regardless of you believing in them (yet).

The tools we all have access to is unbelievable. If you don't feel like the future is already here, and it's just prime time to start making the new generation of innovations using these tools, you're going to be left in the dust.

Innovation never goes anywhere it just needs time to adapt, I think.

Come and see me 5-10 years from now, and maybe I can say I told you so.

Looking at the comments, I find it kind of odd that this issue is polarizing. What exactly is the nature of the divide between the extremes of the people who think we've had no progress vs those who think we've had considerable progress?

I would hazard a guess that the "substantial-progress" crowd is assuming that physics and chemistry have been largely figured out and there's nothing else to do there except tidying up some loose ends and working with what we've got and the only place progress could possibly come from is through information technology manipulating what we have.

The no-progress crowd are waiting for the next big fundamental breakthrough like the discovery of the microbe, quantum physics, and electricity.

I still don't understand why the vitriol is thrown around on this one so hard by the "substantial progress" crowd. Maybe they think that the "no-progress" crowd are a bunch of lunatics for believing there are fundamental things that we could discover that could significantly increase our understanding of the fundamentals of physics, chemistry or biology.

The reason that I agree that there is low innovation is that innovation eventually results in economic acceleration. Think industrial revolution.

However, innovation has not stopped if you consider that in the last century we have Ford Motor company, fast food, marketing as industry, rock-and-roll, Sony Walkman, Levis, iPod, etc. There is a ton of innovation.

But unfortunately, it needs to be disruptive innovation that changes how efficient we are and improves quality of life. Writing new webapps does not do that. Designing new iPhones does not do that.

Something else to consider is that the time is ripe for something other than technological innovation. What if we could better understand the world we live in and come closer to God? What if we could overcome the 50/50 political divide causing so much hate in our country from both sides? What if peace could be reached with all countries? That would also be innovation, because we can't seem to figure out a way to do it currently.

The real lack of innovation is in the social and political structures we have to live with. And those are a product of primate brains that evolve at a much slower rate than our technological sophistication.

Right at the moment, the dominant political regime on this planet is still concerned with areas of land under military hegemony, and is apparently completely incapable of dealing with things like keeping this planet habitable over the short term, much less the long term.

We have paleolithic brains dealing with state-of-the-art environmental problems in the context of 17th century political institutions and 20th century financial institutions in a society run by people who would like to retreat to 12th century religious values because THE FUTURE IS SCARY AND UNCERTAIN.

Like someone said, we are in one whole joojooflop situation here.

[1]. Joojooflop http://www.zootle.net/afda/faq/e.shtml

Having globally usable handheld networked computers with location capability and voice and video communication capabilities that is simple enough for the average person to use is a pretty big innovation of the past decade.

Just look at the latest smartphones, they are amazing. That much computer, network, sensor and display power in that size of a package is incredible and real innovation even if it has been evolutionary over the last couple of decades rather than a single point revolution.

It has made room for a massive amount of minor steps in app development filling in the space created by the modern phone. There is still room for improvement, more accurate location will open further possibilities

What is innovation? The author seems to focus to much on the dramatic or thing that directly impact our lives. While there are a lot of things that don't directly make our lives more meaningful (Halo,etc.), there are amazing advances that have made living today so very exciting!!

Hand, face, arm, leg and ovarian transplants. (& others) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_transplantation#Timeline...

Better response to heart disease, (near) instant medical record sharing, targeted cancer treatments, human genome, anti-smoking research & bans in 27 states, functional MRI, robots performing surgery http://www.medpagetoday.com/InfectiousDisease/PublicHealth/1...

snopes.com gave people accurate so that we don't have to rely on crap information- no matter how good it sounds.

Doctors can better diagnose patients thanks to information available on PDA.

GPS- now that's amazing. Google "GPS saves lives" seriously!

Cell Phones- also saves lives, makes contacting someone infinitely easier. How did truckers know to call home if there was an emergency at home? Much more difficult!

Ham Radios, Satellite Phones, hearing aids, pacemakers etc. Amazing devices that have done so much for us!

All of the tiny details made it possible to disseminate information, keep better contact perform incredible medical breakthroughs & decrease poverty worldwide. (Cell phones, internet, square, etc. facilitate economic development)

I'm an IT graduate. I look at the amazing inventions in my field. It feels like they all came less than 4 years ago. (when I graduated)

Oh, I forgot to mention the Nobel prizes. (many are very impressive!) Innovation is happening faster than it ever has before! In another 10 years, we may say- poverty & consumer debt is decreasing systemically worldwide, robots are plowing our fields & HIV has a vaccine! I enjoy the wonderful present and look forward to our bright future!

The greatest innovation shall be human compassion and decency. The kind of discovery that doesn't let half of the world starve in a vain pursuit of tech gadgets. The kind of invention that will make it obvious that 47% of a population is not aspiring to live any less freely than the other 53%. The kind of transformation that will end all prejudices.

Alas, while we are great at opening Pandora's box, we totally fail at evolving as spiritual beings.

I believe it has been governments (societies) putting all its resources into something that has been the driver of pushing things forward. Corporations are experts at optimizing the status quo. Real progress takes real capital and great amounts of risk and investment that won't see returns for decades if ever.

Technology cannot solve the problems of the world, because the real problem is human nature. Machiavelli got it right when he said that history repeats because man's passion never changes. The world is nonlinear, everything is cyclical. When history stops repeating, progress will have been made.

The world's 4th largest economy was over 40% powered by solar for two days in May this year. I think we can consider the innovation in PV technology a game changer that will impact the way we live greatly.

Imagine a world with 0 fuel costs, just capital costs.

This era is a fuel towards next golden era. low tech with a very high profit, we need as much resources to go to the next level. As an example -> google mobile (android) + facebook + wikipedia, etc = Project Glass.

All efforts should be spent on finding ways to generate and store clean energy. Instead, VCs keep funding Facebook and Google wannabes.

We just need more of Einsteins, Nikola Teslas and Thomas Edisons less of Zuckerbergs, Steve Jobs and Larry Elisons.

“Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge.”

✓

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/09/20/wikimedia_uk_scandal...

I don't think the pain point for a lot of us is that there isn't much innovation. It's that most of us don't get to take part, nor to guarantee ourselves a fair share of what innovation produces. Most people are barely at the table, without any role or say in the innovation that is going on (which is probably more than at any other time in history).

We have one tiny minority (well-connected political and economic elites) that captures most of the value generated by any change, even though they produce absolutely nothing, and often they get to call the shots, even though they fuck up every decision they make. We have another small minority that is socially inferior and gets less direct benefit out of the changes, but drives them and thereby gets to participate in the current round of innovation.

Then there are the 99-plus percent who are effectively non-players, some well-compensated and most not, but all at the mercy of forces that are not just out of our control (no one actually controls them, no single person has anywhere close to that level of power in this world) but over which we have no influence and no role in the driving.

The angriest among us are the "Cognitive 1 Percent", the ones who know we could be making these important decisions better than the people (politicians, corporate CEOs, VC kingmakers) currently able to make them, the entrenched players being above-average but not at our level.

It feels like there's no innovation. There's plenty, in comparison to any other time in history. There just isn't much of a role in it for any but the most well-situated people.

Isn't this normal ? It was the same with the industrial revolution.Those new innovation enabled shitty factories on a mass scale.

One could even say it was the same in the beginning of the automotive revolution: In the 30's cars we're nice and all , but the new powerful motors and radios enabled nazism and tanks and blietzkrieg more than prosperity.

Maybe it's common : Some get fast insight on the use of new technologies and create huge inequality, but with time and struggle societies adapt and better use those technologies.

It's ending right about now

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/18/science/a-robot-with-a-del...

http://arxivindex.blogspot.ca/2012/09/new-form-of-universal-...

http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2012/nanoelectronics-and-tissu...

That's not an ending, that's a continuation of the progress we've been making for decades. Someone just wanted to write a bitchy article in Wired because they aren't in Minority Report yet.

I have to disagree a little there. There's been huge progress in communication but actual physical things (household robots or medical advances) not much. The linked-to articles (as well drones/robocars) show a beginning of a breakthrough in that sphere.

edit: I agree it's basically a continuation (cheaper) but you can say the same about internet (made in 60s but breakthrough in late 90s)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com