The Speculist

I think there is probably some room for criticism of the singularitarian tendancy to equate increased computation with advances in all fields.

I've lamented the loss of big tech over the last 30 years - the space program treads water, the continued absence of flying cars.

And I'm with Bodanis on his criticism of structural barriers to innovation. Anything we can do to create a creative environment we ought to be busy doing - including graduating more engineers...even if we have to start paying their tuition.

BUT, Bodanis goes too far here. The Internet and exponentially accelerating computation isn't just slick packaging. Sequencing the human genome wasn't a small thing. The promise of nanotech, designer drugs, etc. etc. is huge.

This is total BS.

I have traveled all over the world and if there are countries more advanced than the US, they do a tremendous job of hiding it.

The only thing we are falling behind on is communications and that is due to our government regulations.

I also call BS. Just because we've drastically improved existing things to make them faster and more affordable instead of inventing other things does not mean we are simply repackaging and marketing. That's a value judgement and an ignorant (or elitist) one at that.

Now that some of you have weighed in, I'll tell you what I thought about the story.

(BTW rjs, I think the whole editorial tone of Discover is elitist--I thought my subscription had expired, actually and I decided not to renew it for that very reason--but an issue appeared in the mail yesterday and I couldn't resist getting some Speculist commentary on this story.)

The useful information in the article was buried in the cute "Dear Corey" schtick and Bodanis offered no balanced viewpoint listing things like the genome and nanotech that are truly remarkable accomplishments.

I agree, however, that we need to pay attention to the trends Bodanis mentioned that could hamper innovation.

If you ask me the rate of change peaked at the start of the 20th century.

Don't believe me? A person growing up in the 1880s or 1890s (in a western country) typically lived on a farm, where the fields were plowed by horse. Horse was also the fastest transport, unless you lived in the 5% or so of the nation serviced by train.

Maybe you went on a holiday to the nearest big town where you saw a telegraph station or even a balloon, but mostly you worked the land and read by candlelight.

60 years later there was telephones, not just aircraft but jet aircraft, not just electricity but computers and nuclear reactors. There were airlines and movies and many families had cars.

Wyatt Earp got to see and act in movies about himself and the gunfight at the OK corral. The typical family lived in a city and travelled by mechanized transport to a factory or office job.

Now 60 years after that... what has changed to anything like that extent.

You take someone from the 1890s and show him around the 1950s and he would be asking "what's that? What's that?" You take the guy from the 1950s and put him in 2006 and it would be "wow that phone is small and portable, wow you have a TV and it's huge, wow your cars are fast and quiet." He would know what everything was, just they are better these days.

. . .aaaaand then you take Ms. 1950's and show her your PC, and the internet, and you plug her into your Ipod, and she's asking "What's that? What's that?"

Because no, actually; they *wouldn't* know what everything was.