Same with me, it gives me the same feeling of "Living in a science fiction world" that I once felt when cell phones or Google maps came out.

Of course even tough I still use both profusely every day, the feeling of novelty wore out. I expect the same will happen with this.

There was a line from the movie 'Ted', that film about a child's stuffed bear coming to life. It was something along the lines of "No matter how special and amazing something is, eventually people get bored of it and move onto something else."

It will probably be like this for us. The children will just take it for granted as they grow up with it, we will be endlessly amazed by it.

To see the real value of something, take it away. Humans are greedy (mathematically) creatures, so there's no point in mulling over assets which are secure. The awe is the exploration phase of a piece of technology, but the remaining value is still valuable.

In an episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation a redshirt used a tricorder to check the weather and said they would have to beam up soon because a storm was approaching.

At the time I thought to myself: “Bah, that’s never happening, it’s pure fantasy!”

A few years later I told some friends we’d have to pack up our picnic because according to the weather radar app on my phone we had about 7 minutes until we got drenched… no wait… 6 minutes.

5m:30s later we were standing under shelter watching the storm front rolling in, and I remembered that Star Trek scene.

We live in the future.

We basically have tricorders, especially if you consider all the fancy things you can attach to them, like flir IR cameras.

I think we've almost EXCEEDED star trek in that area.

I want a programmable hypospray. I'd be real popular at parties.

I spent most of my youth through the 80s and 90s thinking technology was a bit shit. Computers worked until they ground to a halt with lots of whirring and crunching; we had enormous flat TVs that had terrible pictures; you could store an album of music just about if you jumped through annoying hoops to write it to a disc; MP3 appeared and disappointed because flash memory was limited to 16MB at a sensible price... Then slowly but surely the future happened, until it was suddenly apparent that technology was now outstripping our imagination in many areas. The problem we have now is that society is way behind where it needs to be to make proper use of the tech we have, whilst other areas are woefully underserved by tech at all. We simultaneously have an abundance of tech and not enough engineers to roll it out (whilst struggling with the societal implications of some aspects). Exciting times indeed.

I would say I am in both worlds. Not too excited about a lot developments in computer tech, but mostly because there is a lot of hype on technology that tends be impressive BUT misses the mark on the bold claims.

But with this LK99 stuff, there is not much room for vague wiggle room. The requirements are very clearly defined and if they do it. It is done! It isn't a case of "if in 5 years and $X billion we may be able to produce this stuff", it is a case of they showing a working material.

It is hard not to be excited for this!

Exact opposite for me - with stuff like AI tech, I'm a lot more familiar with the subject matter than the happenings in the material sciences, so it allows me to be more confidently optimistic about computer-related advancements. Even if my education is still insufficient to grasp the full extent of new tech, I can at least try to understand it conceptually.

On the other hand, the LK-99 news seem very promising, but a lot of professionals in the field are still iffy, and everyone who's interested in emerging tech is left searching for breadcrumbs and talking to other enthusiasts. It's likely that we won't know if this is a dud or a world-changing discovery for several weeks to months...

I've been trying to be as cautious as possible when looking at the recent news, but it's difficult to not be cautiously optimistic about at least some things.

Skepticism is a survival skill. That said, I'd be happy to be wrong in this case!

That is pretty cool, I mean, I do get the excitement of the technology of things like AI - I fall more in line with the philosophers or "but what does it really all mean". I'm not sure if what I do is useful at all other than a mental toy to play with. It is more that some folks act like it is the end of all work, others say it is the end of humanity itself - the reality is definitely in the middle there!

When it comes to this stuff there is a fine line between pessimist and optimist. Too optimistic and you will be left disappointed. To pessimistic and you risk being labelled a loom smashing luddite.

I always appreciate those that see the bright future, they will push the technology forward regardless of what others say, but that can also be the path to ruin - as they say, the road to hell is paved with good deeds. It seems as though, we do not know if something is good or not until it is done.

Like with the LK99 news, what it is delivered everything promised. Could this just be the next step of the rebound effect, and we just feed into our base desires and consume even more of everything? It is possible, but we probably won't know until it is well in the rear view mirror.

Interesting times ahead.

> a lot of professionals in the field are still iffy

That seems like a strange perception. I'm seeing the opposite.

When the news had first made the rounds several days ago, the overwhelming sentiment that I felt was "meh, this seems so unprofessional. Probably just another fabrication, like all the previous ones. I guess we might as well check just to be sure". Kind of an exaggeration, but this is what I took away then.

Now that any data from third parties starts slowly dripping in, the perception seems to be changing to very cautious curiosity. No experts are putting their reputation on the line for what little information we have, but interest in this topic is definitely rising. Hence why I said they were 'iffy'.

And there’s the third group that likes to comment on meta-hn behavior in a disparaging way

Like you!

We’re the group doing meta-meta commentary

And stop there.

What is your take on this? At what odds would you bet the material turns out to work as advertised? :)

It seems to me that the second group is also entertained by discussing money, tech salaries in particular.

Sometimes it's so difficult to continue to feel positive about science news when there have been so many instances of false hope. Cautiously optimistic is the best position to be in, I think.

That being said:

I want the magical floating rocks to be real.

I want the talky computer to be self aware and capable of genuine creation.

I want the explanation for UAPs to be aliens.

I want reactionless engine technology.

I definitely still feel excited by things, but time has taught me to temper it.