Chris in China linked on Facebook to a BBC article about a 13 year old comparing a 1980s Walkman to an iPod and I was impressed by his observation about the state of technology:
Personally, I'm relieved I live in the digital age, with bigger choice, more functions and smaller devices. I'm relieved that the majority of technological advancement happened before I was born, as I can't imagine having to use such basic equipment every day.
No doubt I've posted this idea 12 times before but doesn't it strike you as odd that there haven't been that many new forms of personal technology over the last 20 years? Sure there have been advancements but most things we have a trinkets these days are simply advancements on the existing rather than new inventions. There were portable music, DVDs, digital music, mobile phones, bank machines, personal computers and any number of other devices back in the late 80s. I started using the internet in one form or another around 1990. Sure there are better visuals but a usenet forum is no different than a busy beer blog in terms of discussion and speed of information dissemination.
So two questions: (1) what is it that we lack and needs to be invented and (2) what is the reason for the focus on development rather than invention?
Comments
Hans - June 30, 2009 9:02 AM
When I was in Grade 2, our class had a discussion of what life would be like in the year 2000. I postulated that life wouldn't be that different but just that the products we have would be better, faster, cooler. Certainly, computers and lasers are big things and widespread but we had those back in the 70s. My brother and his math club pals were emailing as early as 1983 if not before.
What we really need is new transportation inventions. We need personal jet-packs and/or the "beam me up" thing they have in Star Trek so that I can visit somewhere instantly or so that pizza places can deliver without driving around town. Also, inter-stellar travel technology is long overdue.
brodie - June 30, 2009 10:08 AM
we need spill proof bubbles. no matter how small the container is, every kid knocks over their bubbles after blowing less than 12.
Alan - June 30, 2009 10:21 AM
Shouldn't the toilet duck be the model for that bubble issue?
And can't pneumatic tubes address pizza delivery?
brodie - June 30, 2009 12:10 PM
the toilet bowl cleaner? how so?
I've thought a bit about "beam me up" technology and there would have to prohibitions of use. Hunting would be too easy. And it would take the "peeping tom" problem to a whole new level.
Alan - June 30, 2009 12:50 PM
"Hunting would be too easy"
Gold.
I am fascinated by household product container design so may have got sidetracked there with the toilet duck idea. But there are ways to create dispensing ends of such things so that only so much can spill. I think of the container of my home brewing sterilizing acid for example. Surely such space age design solutions can be applied to recreational bubble blowing.
seanie - June 30, 2009 2:14 PM
I agree with Brodie about the bubbles.
Transporters will never ever be possible and personal jet packs too impractical given the human inability to travel in 2 directions in a car without smacking into each other all the time. I'm all for cold fusion.
David Janes - July 1, 2009 7:31 AM
It's still looking like room-temperature "cold" fusion is a bust, but there are several promising technologies still in the pipe for near-infinite energy.
The real game changer would be Bussard/Polywell Fusion which would be a source of cheap, non-radioactive garbage free energy for everyone at very low prices.
Tokamak fusion will probably never work, though some hold out hope. There's a Canadian group working a novel approach to hot fusion also though I'm not sure really what they're up too.
Finally, there's Thorium Pebble Reactors which although is probably very expensive to run, is blessed by the fact that there's basically an unlimited supply of Thorium to use. If this becomes our energy future, that will cap things such as "peak oil" because there'll be a price point where we can just generate transportation fuels from the environment using an energy supply (or just skip that and go electric).
Jay Currie - July 3, 2009 2:01 AM
Well, a screenless projection unit attached to an iphone would be very cool; but I'd be up for a decent add-on LED light for my cell phone.
Rub on hair regrow which actually works. Non-surgical breast enhancement which works for 48 hours and then fails gracefully. A fountain pen which does not leak and does not cost $500.00.
A spell check which understands "colour" and "labour".
An off switch for my five year old - or, more usefully, parenting strategies which actually work.
A political system we could be proud of.
Cell phones which sense our mood and screen callers accordingly.
A really good computer personal assistant who combines the intelligence of a good legal secretary, the loyalty of a good dog and the sardonic wit of Ms. Moneypenny.
An arterial clearing system with the efficacy of Drano.
Personal memory upload technology with a decent interface.
Intelligence in Ottawa.
I could go on. The depths of discovery are never plumbed.
daryl sawatzky - July 8, 2009 1:42 PM
The problem isn't in creating new gadgets, it's creating a market and convincing people that they need to carry the new gadget around. We only have so many pockets.
Convergence is key. Assume the end user has two pockets. One has a wallet for ID and spare change. What will they use the other pocket for? This explains the popularity of the iPhone, which takes the place of, among other much bulkier things, (in 80's terms) a walkman, a video camera, a still camera, a phone and answering machine, a gameboy, a whole slew of small gadgets like stopwatches, watches, postage stamps envelopes and airmail paper, books of all kinds, levels, bells, whistles, etc.
GPS is new since the 80's. Satellite Maps that go with the GPS are new. So is the whole internet. What else do we need? We need devices now that interact with our other devices. We need to be able to start the car from the iPhone, check the level of milk in the fridge, turn on the oven, get automatic email when the sump pump fails or when the smoke detector goes off, selectively lock and unlock house doors and windows, open garage doors...
Technologies exist that address these issues, but they all operate on their own proprietary systems. We need to make it all web-based and wi-fi accessible.
What we don't have yet is a Universal Translator. Language devices are labor intensive and imprecise.
We don't have non-invasive medicine, ultra-rapid transportation, anti-grav and all that other Star Trek stuff.
There's stuff that's too expensive that shouldn't be. I should be able to build a marble or granite house if there is an unused mountain or quarry nearby. With the large machinery we have these days, why would building with rock be anymore expensive than with wood? The ancients used rock only.
Why is a Venti sized travel mug so hard to find?
Why are speakers so expensive?