By Peter Cochrane, 18 November 2008 11:37
COMMENT
Written on a train from Bristol to London and dispatched to silicon.com via a free wi-fi service in Woodbridge near my home a day later
As a technologist engaged in R&D activities, a part-time academic and investor, I get to see new developments at a really early stage, and sometimes it has been 20 to 30 years between my first sighting and full commercialisation of a particular product or technology.
Technologies often mature far too early for the market, or fail to gain traction for other reasons such as cheaper and alternative solutions. Whatever the reason it is not good news - and timing is everything!
Today we are living off a line of R&D and inventions extending back 10 to 30 years, and the big question is: will the recent reductions in R&D funding by industry and governments impact on our ability to innovate and create new products 10 to 30 years down the line?
The pessimists say yes with some urgency and slight panic in their voice, but I suspect we are witnessing some funding wave function. What do I mean? Well, technological advancements are not a smooth process at all. We actually go forward on the basis of a series of lurches with one raft of innovation powering one economic wave after another.
A key feature of each successive wave is the realisation of more technology, progress and advantage for less material and energy, benefiting a larger proportion of our species. I reckon we are about to see a new wave as the planet powers out of the banking crisis and economic recession.
Today we see a new component in the equation of progress and it is the collapse of the artificial silos of physics, chemistry, biology and mathematics. All are being bridged by technology and computational power. Add this to the web 2.0, 3.0 and 4.0 worlds of the semantic web powered by artificial intelligence and I think innovation itself takes a leg up.
This represents a radical change with man and machine discovering and innovating in unison - something that never happened before.
It goes like this:
- Man innovates and creates tools
- Tools magnify human muscle power
- Tools are used by man to create machines
- Machines are refined by man to become a new class of tool
- Machines magnify human brain power
- Machines manufacture machines
- Networked humans and machines achieve new levels of knowledge
- Networked machines assume intelligence and start evolving
- Machines design and manufacture machines
- Man becomes the QA, legal and ethics department
Many futurologists see the next stage as the singularity - the point at which the machines take over and sideline us.
So should we be worried? Concerned perhaps but worried, no. Looking back over history people have always worried about technology but it is hard to see a better time to be alive than now. If you are not sure take a look at a car, TV, mobile phone, PC and medical treatments from 20 years ago.
Comments
There are 6 comments. Join the discussion
1. Michael Saunby
How about a house, a book, a suit, a carpet, a desk, a tea pot, a chair..... made 20, even 40 years ago? Our lives may not be full of ancient objects but they are mostly made up of ancient designs.
It's reasonable to expect newer technologies such as mobile phones, even cars, to continue to advance, but there are plenty of examples of objects that have already reached their peak. I can't say I notice much difference in a staircase built this year, compared with one built in 1908. Even some electronic items haven't moved on much in the last couple of decades - my HP calculator is over 20 years old, a new one would be no better in any meaningful way.
2. anonymous
Interesting article, there are always naysayers and a number of competing forces which affect the traction of new technologies, business models et al. What industries/technologies are reaching an inflection point, other than those immediately close to mind?
3. Declan Trezise
Peter,
Once again you choose to end on the old chestnut of the bleak future vision of "Man vs. Machine" which we cannot help but lose. I have however recently envisioned a whole new frightening concept which perhaps echoes the luddite uprisings during the industrial revolution.
You wrote in your last blog entry about the increasing prominence of virtual avatars representing real humans online. I find myself reading (ever more frequently - especially on the BBC) of the dangers of MMORPGs and their ability to suck the life out people one 18 hour 'raiding' session at a time.
My fear is that people will increasingly choose the virtual over the real as the hyper-real exaggerations of the virtual become far more appealing than drudgery of real-life. There will be celebrations as the virtual unites parts of the world thus far separated by geography, race, religion etc. and I'm sure within my lifetime I will live to see the story of the child who is born to only ever live his life plugged into the virtual world experiencing life without the differentiation between real and virtual.
The problem I forsee is the conflict between people who choose never to enter the virtual world (physcially having to work to support the frail bodies of those choosing to live full-time in the virtual world) and those living the high-life in the clean and merry ethereal playground of the virtual where your hit-points regenerate and your face is a pretty as you desire. I don't know how this dynamic will effect the world's politics, cultures and climate but I can be pretty sure there'll be conflict as ever there is when one ideology butts up against another.
The AI's that exist in the virtual world will however not care a jot whether they're interacting with a biological neural network or a silicon based one - we'll both look the same in the virtual world. As ever I predict Man will be his own worst enemy.
4. Peter Cochrane
Michael = You need to look closer and think more. The basic form of many things don't change because of the human body or their base functionality, but every object you cite has changed markedly through the use of new materials and the methods of manufacture .
New ceramics, new fibres, new adhesives, better design, robotic assembly/control means they all use less energy/fewer atoms and are generally more durable.
Your old HP calculator requires 5 - 10 fold the atoms and uses far more energy than the modern equivalent. But progress in mathematics, and the lack of progress in peoples mathematical abilities sees the same basic functions today!
Why is all this important? It means more people can enjoy a wealth of goods and facilities at a much lower cost - and with a much lower impact on the planet.
Peter
PS = You need to take a course in staircase design and production!
5. Peter Cochrane
Anonymous = Hmm - I think this deserves a book. But the point of inflection is being approached by such o lot of our base technologies based on Silicon, Steel, Plastics...and of course transport, food production, logistics in all its forms are on trajectories that will have to change. Peter
6. Peter Cochrane
Decian = My - you are a pessimist - have you ever considered a future as a science fiction writer or movie maker? I just don't feel pessimistic about the future at all.
Consider the potential upside and the benefits we can realize! The list is endless, and people have been adopting your view since the start of the industrial revolution (Satanic Mills etc) but the human race seems, in general, to be far more sensible.
Eg - I could go to a gym and jog on a running machine - but I choose the real thing! I could spend all my time watching TV or playing games, or wandering about in 2nd Life, but I am doing far less of this and spend more time exploiting the new technologies to enhance my creativity in the real and virtual worlds.
The future is in our (individual) hands. Peter