Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sergarr]

Your definition of "same technology" is very weird.

But even with it, you can't say that there was no technological development since 1950. Besides space flight and computers, there are also things like: lasers, atomic force microscopy, concentrated energy flow treatment in general, amorphous alloys, nanomaterials, hot isostatic pressing treatment, nuclear fuel reprocessing, thermonuclear weaponry and fusion reactors, and many, many others.

Ironically enough, you've complained about people with GPS getting lost, but here:

We sent people to the moon with the power of a fucking pocket calculator and long-hand math, and now people can't get to a damned neighboring town without GPS.  You want to mouth off about development then how about we compare the actual accomplishments, not the applications.

Materials science still hasn't moved us out of the iron age, none of the so called 'ages' since are actually anything but hubris, there is no 'industrial age' no 'atomic age' and certainly no 'information age', we have accomplished fuck-all since the moon landings.

I see that you display exactly the same kind of ignorance about the outside reality that you example person relying on GPS does. Material science has evolved immensely since 1950s, like everything else. You're just so full of ignorance that you evidently didn't even bother to look it up.

And before you say it - yes, new materials count as new technology, because the technology of producing them is technology. And it is, by definition, new.

Edit: Yes, Shadowlord, you are correct, but we, as a rule, define technologies by their function, not their component systems.  There are hundreds of different types of sword, but they are all levers with ramps attached, allowing them to penetrate materials. We can call it a film camera, a digital camera, a video recording camera, but it is still the same function.

Replace that "we" with "I".

[Frumple]

What was the original point you were trying to make, that humanity hasn't developed a lot after 1950 because we didn't invent a lot of things?

Eh, more along the lines that we haven't developed because we haven't invented specific things in specific ways, apparently.

snip

And... yeah. You're definitely going to get disagreement that we're not moving, because there's, y'know, whole hosts of crap happening in regards to scientific development right now. The movement is significant, you're just... intentionally, apparently... applying a filter to it that disregards it.

... though, with what you just said, why would you compare the trains by their drive systems instead of their function? The drive system is a component system, the part that moves the freight. If a steam and maglev train are indeed different technologies, then a film and digital camera would be just as well. They both have one primary point of functional similarity (focusing light via lens, carrying freight), and one primary point of component difference (capturing its imprint via chemical or digital means, providing movement by steam or maglev).

[Teneb]

Daguerreotype one true camera, no optics development since it.

But seriously, NFO isn't going to budge from his position. Neither is anyone else, for that matter. Let's just drop the subject.

[Frumple]

Well yeah, of course not. M'just curious how deep the rabbit hole goes. Not trying to budge it, just trying to figure out how it's constructed. It's rather incredibly abnormal, after all.

[ManMan]

Well yeah, of course not. M'just curious how deep the rabbit hole goes. Not trying to budge it, just trying to figure out how it's constructed.

I'm not sure about how it's constructed, but surely it uses the same technology cameras use.

[Sergarr]

Well yeah, of course not. M'just curious how deep the rabbit hole goes. Not trying to budge it, just trying to figure out how it's constructed.

I'm not sure about how it's constructed, but surely it uses the same technology cameras use.

If you squint at it hard enough, everything uses the same technology cameras use. After all, there's a hypothesis that the entire universe is a holographic projection from its surface, and that's, like, close enough to what cameras do, right?

[NullForceOmega]

Snipped.

I am going to respond to this last statement, and then drop it, because this is going nowhere.

The fundamental problem here is that you are equating science with technology.  This is a mistake I see scientists make over and over again.  Now, before your miserable diatribe, I was going to comment that there have been advances in materials knowledge, and that they are actually starting to drive technology again, but I had something important to, i.e. pick up my son from school.

Science is the process we use to accumulate knowledge, that knowledge in of itself is important, but is not a technology.  Technology is the way we use our knowledge to interact with the world, and is therefore a concept built entirely on application.

There, I'm done.

[IcyTea31]

we have accomplished fuck-all since the moon landings.

Word Wide Web, made public in 1989.
Wikipedia, launched in 2001.
Human Genome Project, completed in 2003.
Large Hadron Collider, construction finished in 2008.

[Truean]

I am more than willing to change. I would like something to change to beyond: being worthless.

Those horse drivers had something to become: car drivers, truck drivers, etc. Moreover, they were given MORE options, not less. Additionally, the entire industry and facet of transportation expanded vastly, because it enabled more and created spur industries catering to those new cars.

Henry Ford was the only reason this was able to occur. Ford was sued by his investors (including the worthless dodge brothers) for "trying to transform his business into a charity." Ford said, "A chicken in every pot and a car in every garage." He was thinking BIG PICTURE and creating not just a company but an entire industry. He paid his labor MORE not less, because he realized he needed somebody to be able to buy his cars and not just catering to the wealthy, despite that having been the more profitable avenue at the time. Ford was a man of vision not because of his industrialization but because of his philosophy and his humanity. Flawed? Very? Did some good besides? Yes.

Obsoleted? No. Improved? Yes. I like being able to make change in my head as opposed to JUST on a machine. There is value in that.

This and the basic income comment. Yes. If we ever reach Star Trek levels, please. Yes. Unfortunately, I have so much less faith in the real world and believe that things will become more of a disutopia than a utopia. I sincerely hope I am wrong on this one point. Even in Star Trek's mythology timeline, earth underwent a period of time when the Bell Riots happened in response to this and there was vast distance between rich and poor.... Equality is the dream we must wake to achieve; will we? I don't know and fear not.

We are in no way dealing with the replacement problem, even adequately. If we could have some dream world where we had Star Trek Replicators or even sufficent excess production capacity that no one ever did without, fine. You can probably feel the doubt at this point....

Helping humans, yes; replacing humans, no.

[Loud Whispers]

we have accomplished fuck-all since the moon landings.

Word Wide Web, made public in 1989.
Wikipedia, launched in 2001.
Human Genome Project, completed in 2003.
Large Hadron Collider, construction finished in 2008.

>wikipedia

[Sonlirain]

we have accomplished fuck-all since the moon landings.

Word Wide Web, made public in 1989.
Wikipedia, launched in 2001.
Human Genome Project, completed in 2003.
Large Hadron Collider, construction finished in 2008.

>wikipedia

Long distance communication via telegraph existed even before WW2 so the web is completely obsolete. *huff*
Wikipedia is just an encyclopedia so nothing new those existed in the medieval ages. *huff*
The human genome project is just follow up on discovering genes. Again nothing new. *huff*
The large hadron collider is just an enlarged small hardon collider that's probably an old technology as well. *huff*

Boy this paint is making me woozy.

[ManMan]

What if we created hoverboards, would they be old technology?

[hector13]

we have accomplished fuck-all since the moon landings.

Word Wide Web, made public in 1989.
Wikipedia, launched in 2001.
Human Genome Project, completed in 2003.
Large Hadron Collider, construction finished in 2008.

>wikipedia

Long distance comunication via telegraph existed even before WW2 so the web is completely obsolete. *huff*

'cept telegraph could only do, like, words and shit. Not gigabytes of information to the other end of the world nigh instantaneously.

[Shadowlord]

just an enlarged small hardon collider

Yes, even the ancient greeks had hardon colliders!

[majikero]

I'm sure hard-ons been colliding since time immemorial.