News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The mean age of high-tech founders is 43, economists say by gowld on Tuesday September 04, 2018 @03:18PM (#17911980)
When has there NOT been a technological revolution?

From the 1970s to today:

Microsoft OS, Apple Macintosh, Dell PCs (a star that faded but was once dominant), Amazon shopping, Google web search, Facebook social network, plus all their competitors dotted in between.

Re:The mean age of high-tech founders is 43, economists say by JumpCrisscross on Tuesday September 04, 2018 @03:50PM (#17912230)
> When has there NOT been a technological revolution?

The Middle Ages, for one. Most of human history has been characterized by episodic innovation bookended by centuries of zero growth.

Re:The mean age of high-tech founders is 43, economists say by twtw on Tuesday September 04, 2018 @03:58PM (#17912280)
Except that the Middle Ages in Europe was the same time period as the Islamic Golden Age.
Re:The mean age of high-tech founders is 43, economists say by Retric on Tuesday September 04, 2018 @04:13PM (#17912384)
The Islamic Golden Age has a nice name, but represented little actual scientific or technological progress relative to a 600 year time period.

For comparison the European dark ages had quite a bit of progress in algebra, farming etc, but again covered several hundred years so progress was slow.

Re:The mean age of high-tech founders is 43, economists say by mnl on Tuesday September 04, 2018 @06:30PM (#17913431)
Just no, and I don't understand what's the point in posting uneducated personal opinions here and stating them as facts.

The "European dark ages" had literally zero progress in algebra, it was Boethius's De arithmetica in the Quadrivium for six centuries until Fibonacci's Liber abaci introduced the hindu-arabic numbers, which he learned in what today we call Algeria. And then algebraic methods (BTW "algorithm" comes from the name of al-Khwarizmi, "algebra" comes from "al-jabr") were unknown in Europe until Robert of Chester translated Khwarizmi's "Hisab Al-jabr w'al-muqabala" to Latin from the original in Arabic. There was zero progress in algebra in Europe for six centuries because they had no algebra. After that (there was a bit of a divide between abacists and algebrists), people doing algebra in Europe used that book until the printed arithmetics/algebras of the 16th century. All of them do mention their sources: you can download them in google books and look it up.

Re:The mean age of high-tech founders is 43, economists say by Retric on Tuesday September 04, 2018 @07:58PM (#17913943)
I am not saying they where as important as Carolingian minuscule, but I recall a few things being mentioned in a history of math class 20 years ago.

Really though any progress over 500 years is all it takes to avoid complete stagnation. https://plus.maths.org/content/lost-mathematicians-numbers-n...

PS: Now they where not building the kind of great feats of engineering that gets you geometry progress, but their accounting systems got really complex.

Re:The mean age of high-tech founders is 43, economists say by enraged_camel on Tuesday September 04, 2018 @07:10PM (#17913659)
You may want to go do some reading on these topics because pretty much everything you said is incorrect. There was almost no scientific or technological progress during Europe's Early Middle Ages (the so-called "Dark Ages").

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_science_in_the_Middle...

Re:The mean age of high-tech founders is 43, economists say by Retric on Tuesday September 04, 2018 @07:39PM (#17913834)
I mostly agree on science, but technology is a different story. There where real advancements in farming technology resulting in higher crop yields for example. Warfare saw the most obvious improvements but it was not alone.
Re:The mean age of high-tech founders is 43, economists say by dredmorbius on Tuesday September 04, 2018 @05:44PM (#17913075)
It's been a fairly consistent trend from ~1825 to present, with some hotter and cooler periods, as well as shifts in focus. 1875-1925 was especially potent.