The Technological “Dark Age”

Over the Past 10,000 years, mankind has seen technological advances unlike any other age. According to the World Book Mulitmedia Encyclopedia, Homo Sapiens emerged between 300,000 to 400,000 years ago. Compared to that sort of time scale, 10,000 is just the latest generation!

But my opinion is that this technological age is coming to an end. Not because there are no longer any things left to invent. That is far from over. The “technological dark age” will come to pass because of the way things currently are. There are forces in our world whose sole purpose is to maintain the status quo. And technology is a threat to those forces.

Image Credit: greekadman

Technological Dark Age

A few centuries ago, the individual played a very important role in the advancement of Science. The greatest discoveries in the last century itself have all been due to individuals. Alexander Fleming, Heisenberg, Einstein, Dirak and too many more to mention. The greatest inventions all have the names of people attached to them. The light bulb (with a carbon filament), the aeroplane, the telephone, and the printing press.

In the modern day world however, the individual no longer has this claim to greatness. There are two reasons for this. In the first place, there are not many things that are unknown at first glance. Our ancestors could look around them and find questions. How high is the sky? Why is it blue? What are stars? How the heck is lightning formed? These days, all phenomena that is apparent to us is readily explained. There are still things to be discovered to be sure. However, in order to understand what we don’t know itself requires a considerable degree of expertise. For example, I know that we’re all searching for the elusive Higgs Boson. But to really understand why it’s so important and why it’s difficult to find requires a high degree of proficiency in theoretical physics. Simply getting to starting point is difficult enough.

Secondly, most technological inventions have been spurred by laziness. We thought candles were too much of a bother so we needed the light bulb. We thought that manual calculations were too difficult to so we made the computer. Walking is a pain, and so we built the automobile. There are many more things that can make our lives easier, and in that sense, there is certainly scope of innovation. But the rules have changed.

There are plenty of good ideas that we read about every day that will substantially increase the quality of our lives. Imagine for a moment that we find out we can easily harness Solar Energy for our energy requirements. In order to make it technologically feasible, considerable research needs to go into it. This research needs money. I can imagine Oil Companies being very interested in this research. Not in order to further it, but to throttle it. Nothing could be simpler for them, than to talk to one person, buy his or her patent for their latest invention, and let it collect dust on the shelves.

Suppose a new technique of communication was discovered that didn’t require us to use AT&T’s infrastructure? You can be quite sure that AT&T will lobby hard to throttle it pretty soon. Certain technologies take time to mature even though they may not be ideal at first. It took decades for the Airplane to be accepted as a viable way of travel even after the Wright Brothers had demonstrated their feasibility.

Another example is how major corporations like the RIAA are trying to throttle p2p. The RIAA would be exceedingly happy if the entire Bittorrent technology was scrapped, along with all the good that comes of it. But why go so far? The RIAA claims that even ripping CD’s to your harddisk is illegal. They would be happy if that technology was scrapped as well.

Similarly, corporations are trying hard to ensure that DVD’s can’t be copied.

The danger is something like Mark Elivins’ High Level Equilibrium Trap which attempts to describe why China’s technological growth came to an end and missed the industrial revolution. The current situation was just so comfortable that it didn’t warrant any need for future invention.

In my opinion, we are fast heading to a technological stagnation where only incremental changes on existing technology are allowed to flourish by those who benefit from it. Large corporations have every interest to see promising technologies crash and die in order to avoid the inevitable changes that they will bring if allowed to go forward.

3 comments to The Technological “Dark Age”

  • Dan W

    This post is so flawed I don’t know where to begin.

    Has Microsoft managed to throttle google? No.

    How many of the blue chip companies that comprised the S&P500 index 50 years ago still exist? Probably less than 50%.

    Is the internet censored in western nations, apart from kiddie porn and terrorist sites? No.

    Can the powers that be prevent the truth about the exploitative nature of our monetary system leaking out to wider and wider audiences? They can try but ultimately they will fail.

    Technological innovation has never ceased in human history and there is no reason for it to do so now.

    Doom and gloom about our economic future is well justified but to try and pile on nonsense about deliberately supressed technological innovation is not. It will be new technology of one form or another that pulls us out of the coming slump.

  • A point that you are missing is that the Boeing 747 didn’t just fly out of the forehead of the Wright Brothers. For a long period of time before their first successful attempt, their had been a heated race to get there first. The Wright Brothers get the accolades for being the first powered flight, but they didn’t win the race by much.

    Modern airlines resulted from a long string of innovations and inventions, just as any major industry did. Even “the light bulb” is very different from that which Edison developed. Others improved on it.

    Cell phones are a very successful compeitor to AT&T. Cell phone are even competitors to Palm Pilots, email, and movie theaters.

    As long as there are markets and competition, there will be innovation. There is always competition for ideas. Those ideas are based on the ideas of others. Companies that don’t embrace change are those that end up in the corporate graveyards.

    The only way innovation will die away is if all countries suppress markets Barring that, those nations that suppress economic freedom the least will be the ones that prosper and spur inventors to build a better mouse trap.

  • polo la martina

    I agree there are risks to the economy. Flooding a few large banks and insurance companies with hundreds of billions in liquidity is a very bad strategy.

Leave a Reply

 

 

 

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>