News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:What We Get Wrong About Technology by lordnacho on Wednesday August 30, 2017 @03:12AM (#15130229)
I wonder if the great leap he mentions (1870-1970) is mostly from the discovery of electromagnetism.

It would seem to be magical. Here's this thing that allows you to move huge amounts of power over vast distances, but deposit it in whatever tiny portions you like, in whatever room you want, and it's so easy you run the wires along your existing walls.

The same force allows you to send both signal and power through thin air. And if you don't want it there, you can shield from it.

Or you can make a motor quite elegantly by winding some wires.

And you can manipulate it so finely that you can do calculations with teeny tiny amounts of it. And store the results.

But one thing I was wondering was how much it depends on basic science. Now that we've discovered EM, have we exhausted the basic knowledge about the world? Is every tech going forward just refinements on particular aspects of nature, or is it unlimited how we combine things?

Re:What We Get Wrong About Technology by Robotbeat on Wednesday August 30, 2017 @11:09AM (#15132740)
You're quite right about EM, I think.

And by the way, I think the lithium battery enhances this dramatically because it makes it practical for EM-based power to be mobile, not just stationary. It's a little like how coal enabled machine power to move away from rivers (i.e. watermills) in the 19th century into factories all over and start moving a little bit on large and/or fixed infrastructure (like ships and rail), and how oil enabled machine power to become completely mobile in the 20th Century.

Lithium batteries (especially as they'll become perfected in the form of lithium-sulfur and lithium-air) enable electromagnetic energy, that most magical form of energy (distinct from mere thermal or mechanical power), to become completely mobile as well and also even for fixed electricity no longer reliant on fossil fuels for prime energy but also able to utilize any kind of inexpensive energy source (wind, solar, etc).

Lithium batteries are to the 21st Century what the internal combustion engine was to the 20th. Smartphones, tablets, drones, electric cars, and into the rest of the 21st century: vast usage of renewable energy, full electrification of ground transport, spreading to air transport, even rocket engines (RocketLab's engines really wouldn't be possible without lithium batteries), cubesats, Hyperloop, etc.

Re:What We Get Wrong About Technology by sametmax on Wednesday August 30, 2017 @04:20AM (#15130539)
> But one thing I was wondering was how much it depends on basic science. Now that we've discovered EM, have we exhausted the basic knowledge about the world? Is every tech going forward just refinements on particular aspects of nature, or is it unlimited how we combine things?

People centuries ago probably asked themself the same question. Let's just assume we are missing massive chunks of informations.

Re:What We Get Wrong About Technology by KGIII on Wednesday August 30, 2017 @06:21AM (#15130974)
I think it hubris to consider our current understanding to be the apex. So, yes, I agree. We made use of electricity long before we understood the electron. There are many more unanswered questions and our understanding is far from complete.
Re:What We Get Wrong About Technology by rwallace on Wednesday August 30, 2017 @08:08AM (#15131415)
> Now that we've discovered EM, have we exhausted the basic knowledge about the world?

I don't know whether there is more basic science to be discovered, but even if there isn't, there is plenty of technology to be invented within the scope of existing science. Atomically precise manufacturing, for example: we know about atoms, but our ability to work with them is still crude in the extreme.

Re:What We Get Wrong About Technology by tachyonbeam on Wednesday August 30, 2017 @09:40AM (#15132040)
And even if we did have atom-precise manufacturing. This could enable say, the construction of nanobots, and these could possibly be used to perform surgery or cure cancer, but making nanobots that cure cancer, even if you already have nanobots, is probably more challenging than the Apollo moon mission (how do you control a swarm of tiny spaceships to make them do useful things inside a human body?). The possibilities (and challenges) are endless.
Re:What We Get Wrong About Technology by adrianN on Wednesday August 30, 2017 @03:53AM (#15130426)
Quantum computers are still in the "we have discovered the basic science, but the engineering is lacking" phase. If we'd manage to make them work as amazingly well as classical computers we could do some things we're currently struggling with much better. Foremost anything that has to do with quantum mechanical simulations, for example designing new drugs, creating useful protein nanomachines, predicting material properties...

Another cool step up in terms of technology would be the manipulation of black holes. Black holes are, via Hawking radiation, excellent mass->useful energy converters. If we manage to create some small black holes we could for example travel much faster around the universe, without having to create and store dangerous amounts of antimatter.

Re:What We Get Wrong About Technology by caseymarquis on Wednesday August 30, 2017 @07:52AM (#15131334)
That sounds a bit dangerous to the lay person...
Re:What We Get Wrong About Technology by adrianN on Wednesday August 30, 2017 @08:23AM (#15131476)
Anything that makes a good propulsion system for a space ship is a bit dangerous.
Re:What We Get Wrong About Technology by Mystrl on Wednesday August 30, 2017 @12:33PM (#15133532)
Can't remember where this quote is from but: A reaction drive's efficiency as a weapon is in direct proportion to its efficiency as a drive.