Why Is Peter Thiel Pessimistic About Technological Innovation?
1–10 of 155 posts
Re: Why Is Peter Thiel Pessimistic About Technological Innovation?
#2Wow, that article is a total bummer. But it seems to me he's cherry picking all of the things that haven't worked out so well, or progressed as fast as we'd like and pronouncing us a failure.... What about all the things that we didn't predict, that we DO have? We are remarkably close to self driving cars... that is awesome... Some recent breakthroughs in AI I suspect will be rippling through our civilization for quite a while to come...
Re: Why Is Peter Thiel Pessimistic About Technological Innovation?
#3"I sort-of date the end of rapid technological progress to the late-60s or early-70s. At that point something more or less broke in this country and in the western world more generally which has put us into a zone where there’s much slower technological progress."
I've believed for years that we entered something like a minor dark age (dim age?) on or about 1970, and that computers have become synonymous with "technology" because it was the only sector that didn't get the memo. Everything else basically stopped cold around 1970, and some fields (e.g. aerospace) have actually gone into reverse.
I am very heartened to see people with the fame and fortune of Peter Thiel et. al. raising this issue and basically agreeing, but I have yet to see an explanation that truly seems to work.
Peter I think oversells libertarianism when he blames regulation-- while regulation slows progress by increasing costs and making experimentation hard, free markets' reluctance to invest in "zero to one" ideas also slows progress. Nearly all the "zero to one" stories I am familiar with were government funded, usually in a time of war or threat of war. VCs and other investors normally want to fund "one to N" ideas because there is at least a provable market there and the hard stuff is mostly done already.
I've got some other ideas but I'm curious about what HN thinks.
Re: Why Is Peter Thiel Pessimistic About Technological Innovation?
#4Wow, that article is a total bummer. But it seems to me he's cherry picking all of the things that haven't worked out so well, or progressed as fast as we'd like and pronouncing us a failure.... What about all the things that we didn't predict, that we DO have? We are remarkably close to self driving cars... that is awesome... Some recent breakthroughs in AI I suspect will be rippling through our civilization for qui…
Everything you cite is in or closely related to the IT sector, which is the exception. Every other sector has gone cold or even backwards since ~1970.
Re: Why Is Peter Thiel Pessimistic About Technological Innovation?
#5I think we're at the top of an S curve. And it's reflected in the stock market:
http://www.multpl.com/s-p-500-price/
After 6 years of 0% interest rate, we've clawed our way back to the dot-com bubble, and no higher. Our foot is completely down on the gas pedal, and we're hardly getting anywhere.
What will the next S curve be? Space? AI? I'm not sure, but as things stand, I can't help but chuckle remorsefully when I think back to the exuberance I felt when I read my first Kurzweil book.
Re: Why Is Peter Thiel Pessimistic About Technological Innovation?
#6Wow, that article is a total bummer. But it seems to me he's cherry picking all of the things that haven't worked out so well, or progressed as fast as we'd like and pronouncing us a failure.... What about all the things that we didn't predict, that we DO have? We are remarkably close to self driving cars... that is awesome... Some recent breakthroughs in AI I suspect will be rippling through our civilization for qui…
Everything you cite is in or closely related to the IT sector, which is the exception. Every other sector has gone cold or even backwards since ~1970.
But I got the feeling that the other sectors need IT for advancement.
IT just has to get on a level that it's full power can be used by everyone.
Re: Why Is Peter Thiel Pessimistic About Technological Innovation?
#7"I sort-of date the end of rapid technological progress to the late-60s or early-70s. At that point something more or less broke in this country and in the western world more generally which has put us into a zone where there’s much slower technological progress." I've believed for years that we entered something like a minor dark age (dim age?) on or about 1970, and that computers have become synonymous with "techno…
[deleted]
Re: Why Is Peter Thiel Pessimistic About Technological Innovation?
#8Because we wanted flying cars and all we got was online payments.
Re: Why Is Peter Thiel Pessimistic About Technological Innovation?
#9Wow, that article is a total bummer. But it seems to me he's cherry picking all of the things that haven't worked out so well, or progressed as fast as we'd like and pronouncing us a failure.... What about all the things that we didn't predict, that we DO have? We are remarkably close to self driving cars... that is awesome... Some recent breakthroughs in AI I suspect will be rippling through our civilization for qui…
Everything you cite is in or closely related to the IT sector, which is the exception. Every other sector has gone cold or even backwards since ~1970.
Self-Driving would classify under transportation.
Re: Why Is Peter Thiel Pessimistic About Technological Innovation?
#10"I sort-of date the end of rapid technological progress to the late-60s or early-70s. At that point something more or less broke in this country and in the western world more generally which has put us into a zone where there’s much slower technological progress." I've believed for years that we entered something like a minor dark age (dim age?) on or about 1970, and that computers have become synonymous with "techno…
The cold war having gone by the tipping point was also a very large factor. This tied into the moonrace, and the spin off innovations from that.
As a side note, It has always annoyed me that there's a loud contingent of people that object to human space travel on the basis it's not the most efficient way to conduct science, because that is not the point of it. It is a signal of intent, throwing the baton far into the future and hoping to reach it and somehow making it, with innumerable side benefits. What we've lost is the entire will for moonshots, and no one in society is engaged in anything like it.
Sometimes I'm an ultra libertarian too, but I suspect the reason Thiel wouldn't follow this reasoning is purely on the basis of who was doing the spending in that era.