Re:Can we survive technology? (1955) [pdf]
by rayiner on Saturday August 17, 2019 @03:31PM
(#20725825)
Low regulation is a necessary but not sufficient condition for innovation. You also need the predicate technologies, precision manufacturing capabilities, etc. But within the US, where we have those things, loosely regulated industries (like the Internet) have consistently evolved faster than heavily regulated ones.
Re:Can we survive technology? (1955) [pdf]
by jodrellblank on Saturday August 17, 2019 @10:25PM
(#20727841)
Low regulation is a necessary but not sufficient condition for innovation.
Restating it isn't convincing. Innovation didn't stop when slavery was banned, innovation didn't stop when Romans mandated that bread sellers sold a fair amount of bread, or when weights and measures were standardised in commercial transactions, or when mains electrical devices had to be earthed/grounded/double-insulated.
"You can't pollute groundwater with careless discharge of nuclear waste" - innovate within that constraint.
Re:Can we survive technology? (1955) [pdf]
by coolspaz on Sunday August 18, 2019 @12:12AM
(#20728193)
It's not just about regulation . The eco-liberals of the 80s and 90s actively influenced the political landscape to stop nuclear power, which also caused companies to halt investments.
We shouldn't be rewriting history now that we see that nuclear power could have actually prevented global climate change.
Are African and Latin American countries with less effective governments and less regulation are leading the world in innovation, cheap nuclear power, genetic engineering and so on?
A casual disregard for the living and a "happily ever after" fairy tale correlates pretty well with a lot of cult and religious behaviours, and associated human tragedies, but not very well with actual happily ever after, I think.