You must log in or register to comment.
No wonder it took that plane 66 years to fly to the moon. It looks really slow.
If it’s true that these two photographs are only separated by 66 years, does that mean that NASA faked the moon landing on the beach at Kitty Hawk?
And technical innovation has been stagnant ever since. Keeping most people, some of whom could be coming up with new ideas if they had time and resources to explore their passions, working dead end service jobs and exhausting themselves just to make ends meet so 12 people can have all the money is more important.
Yes I know the phone in my pocket is more powerful than the Apollo guidance computer by many orders of magnitude, but that’s just iterating on an old concept. To me, innovation is jet engines for airplanes, or rockets capable of escaping earth orbit when nothing like it existed before.
mRNA vaccines. Net positive power output from fusion. Off the top of my head.
I agree with your concept of capitalism killing innovation and forcing people into dead-end jobs. But that doesn’t mean technical innovation is dead. Just means it’s not progressing optimally and not benefiting the right people.
isn’t that goochie goo autism old guy halting mRNA research?
Not in any civilized country, no.
I mean for the US. Which is like what, less than 5% of the world population? And now maybe much less??
Generative AI too. It might be hammered into everything to the point of being tiresome, but it is technologically impressive that you can have a computer just synthesise a photo/video/music.
Compare to 20 years ago. Being able to just go “Computer, create for me an original landscape painting”, and have it make one would be something that you’d only find on television/in movies.
What we’re really fucking up is the ramp from fossil to advanced energy sources that could enable massive outward expansion into the solar system. The billionaires are forgetting that a larger piece of a smaller pie is still less pie.
In 2025, most everyone in the world can translate foreign languages at the press of a button. I dislike Gwern since he’s a bigot, but I like his article, “My Ordinary Life: Improvements Since the 1990s.”
We could do that in 2010, which is about where it stagnated.
Google translate isn’t much better than it was in 2010, but LLMs do a much better job. Admittedly, Google Translate is what most people use. It works well enough though.
Yeah. Last tine we gor any positive modal shift was smart phones. That was 17 years ago.
A lot of people mark that as the downfall of the internet.
The phones weren’t the problem.
Well, they fucked uo design a lot, but tgey didn’t ruin everything.
what is even the point of this graph? GDP is a nonsensical metric that barely tells anything about the economy, let alone society and technology.
you could substitute almost any other graph. This isn’t about GDP really, just about change.
i think it’s not meant too literally, more like a meme, to make fun of people who say sci-fi will forever stay sci-fi while at the same time things change very quickly.
GDP is the metric of more, that’s all they are concerned about
Yay! Money! It’s what matters!tm
Even if you don’t care about money, you shouldn’t be feeling like you’re on steady well-trodden ground if you live on the side of a steep slope like this. The same would go for e.g. scientific output (however that’s measured), world population, agricultural output, and so on.
We’re still ignoring the history of all flight and rocketry prior to the invention of the heavier than air aircraft, I see.
Right, we have a glider back in 1853, and rockets forever (thanks war!). Just took a little extra time to put it all together.
In other news, this is what computers looked like 66 years ago. Where/when did we go astray?
Citizens United.
Edit: I lie, it was way before this
I agree, I’m surprised that thing doesn’t have an ashtray.
flat-screen LCD monitors were a mistake.
“We dOn’t hAvE ThE ReSoUrCeS To fEeD AnD HoUsE EvErYoNe!!1”
And the billionaire class could pay for it all without even noticing the expense; their refusal to do so is strictly due to their twisted “ethics” preventing them from “rewarding” the “lazy.” 😡
A rat done bit my sister Nell.
(with Whitey on the Moon)
Her face and arms began to swell.
(and Whitey’s on the Moon)
I can’t pay no doctor bill.
(but Whitey’s on the Moon)
Ten years from now I’ll be paying still.
(while Whitey’s on the Moon)
That guy had a point. And I don’t have an answer. Maybe reallocate some of the defense spending that was already insane at that time?
Right? Stop flinging nerds into space and start feeding the hungry.
OR, how about we stop flinging nerds into space and we still don’t feed the hungry?
-Current US regime
Yawn
No we house people on the moon. If there was an actual colony on the moon I would 100% go there. Earth sucks, it’s got all this pointless outside that I never use.
it’s got all this pointless outside that I never use.
Besties all the air, water, and carbon based life forms you need to eat anyway.
This seems… unrelated?
Disagree, we as a nation put a small percentage of our resources into space exploration just for the sake of a dick measuring contest with another nation.
We could absolutely end poverty.
Of course I think we could have both, but what’s the point of putting a man on the moon if your citizens can’t even afford access to healthcare
Again, unrelated.
I mean, you as a country put some money on parades and libraries and… I don’t know, presumably education? I don’t make any assumptions about the US. Definitely on the military.
It’s not a zero sum game. Even American leftists have bought into this idea that public resources are extraordinarily limited and can’t be shared without severe means testing.
Research and development tends to be fairly profitable in the long run. You don’t feed the poor because you have no political will, not because you have a space program. That’s a conservative talking point.
Right so this was addressed in the “of course we can have both” section of my comment.
So to reiterate, of course we can have both scientific research and provide for our citizens. It’s my view that we should ensure our citizens are provided a basic standard of living and assign the remaining budget from there.
The budget is quite massive and we should have no issue providing for both the people and research/scientific exploration. I would personally assign great value to these types of things. Honestly we can do both at the same time and we can easily do both by reallocating a small percentage of the defense budget but it won’t happen. The budget increase given to Homeland Security is sickening.
Okay, so then it’s unrelated.
Why bring it up when talking about how effective progress in aerospace was at all? If you can have both why prompt it specifically in the one area that is a conservative talking point?
Bring it up when talking about Homeland Security in that case.
This is why I fear Lemmy will fail. I see this every other thread. If someone says something that is even slightly off the topic of the original post people just complain about how it’s unrelated, shutting down the very conversation that makes sites like these interesting.
I jumped into this conversation after the original comment. I thought they had a point. Sure their point was only loosely related, but I thought it was interesting conversation and worth a discussion. But no that would be too much fun.
But it’s not because it’s off-topic.
It’s because it’s a reactionary trope based on a flawed premise that some people parrot for no good reason.
If you or the first poster on this had gone on about how much they like helicopters that would have been quite nice.
I didn’t say “that seems unrelated” because it’s off topic, I said it because the ability to create a social safety net and the ability to do research, even for the sake of international prestige, are in fact unrelated and the only reason to relate them is being hostile to both or trying to deflect from the lack of funding by shifting the blame to actually useful or productive things that do get funded.
I think that’s fun. That’s a fun observation.
Amazing how photography technology improved.
66 years is a long time. Considering that 1969 was 56 years ago, we still have 10 years to do something similarly worthwhile.
… 10 years is also a long time. It can wait until tomorrow.
I’ve had that mindset of “10 years is a long time; what’s one more day” since adolescence. Boom, now it’s 16 years in the future and I’m suddenly a dysfunctional adult struggling to get through each day.
But on the bright side, I just began medication for ADHD, and it’s not only life changing, it’s life saving. I feel capable, motivated, and determined for the first time in my life. Let’s build the future so that 2035 will be a milestone for humanity!
It’s just a question of priorities.
The AI thumbnail isnt real, YouTube faked it in a cooperation effort with the US government to seem like they were winning the AI war between them and China.
Well the equivalent would be to leave the the solar system for this kind of step up. I don’t see even setting foot on Mars by 2035…
We got satellites out of our solar system.
Which launched 48 years ago (or 6 years after the moon landing) 😂
Like the recently anounced nuclear reactor ?
I don’t think that is as big as the moon landing. Finding alien life would be more in the same vein.
We would need a significant technological boost to be able to see the surfaces of alien worlds, I think that technology alone would be a candidate for innovation. After all whether or not we find aliens is not dependant on the technology but depending on if there are any to find.
And only 12 years later…
That is when we peaked as a civilisation. When MTV stopped being a music channel that’s when things started to go downhill.
Hot take: MTV peaked when they were airing animation, not music
Mid 90s were great. You had music in the mornings and then Beavis and Butthead, ren and stimpy, and Daria during the day. Unfortunately, they sprinkled in some RR reality TV shows, which was probably the beginning of the end.
Amen brother.
then The Learning Channel stopped being about learning
then The History Channel stopped being about history
then Fox stopped being about foxes.
I wanted to show real time rendered graphics in the same interval, but there were no real time graphics in 1959.
Still, these two are 33 years apart, so we can do half.
New technologies tend to explode very quickly while there is obvious iteration and improvement from a new principle left on the table and then they settle down as the room for improvement shrinks.
fyi: you can make these show up in your comment by using
! [](imagelink)without the space between ! and [
My experience with how these are rendered in different apps is… inconsistent. I’m not on a Lemmy instance, so I end up going with the simplest option.
If and when all Fedi apps do this properly… well, at that point I wouldn’t have to add anything manually, would I?
Rockets are far older than airplanes and have absolutely nothing in common with each other, other than “things you do in the air”. It’s equivalent to taking a shit and brushing your teeth. Not connected at all.
Except they absolutely influence each other and to pretend like there is a world where one exists without the other, especially building a spaceworthy rocket, is just wrong. Aerospace principles are highly intertwined even if the application of knowledge gained from either is applied differently.
I would say that they’re like brushing and flossing. Very different on the face of it but the background to either is completely linked to the other. Each informs and aids the practice of the other.
You could argue that spitting out some pixels on a CRT has about as much to do with rendering millions of polygons into multiple frame buffers and collecting the whole thing into a digital image to output over HDMI.
The OP makes a decent leap in terms of “things that move us away from the ground”, I don’t have a problem with it, even if there are a handful of big changes in methodology along the way.
I mean, if we take your caveat at face value we end up with some combination of the Concorde, a F-35, the A380 and a remote controlled drone. Honestly, the point stands just as well.
Bathroom
What will come next in 2035? … at the rate we’re going, probably something stupid like femboy hitler
If the news in 2035 must be dominated by a hitler figure, then I will take solace that for some reason this hitler is a femboy.
If JD wants Trump to pay attention to him, he should have stuck with the Ivanka look.
4 years ago JD was anti trump.
He called Trump the next Hitler.
ROFL
Hard to believe that man landed on the moon only 60+ years after landing on Earth. Makes you wonder what’s next
Landing on the moon again. It’s been over fifty years since we’ve been back.
Well there is the Artemis program although it seems massively overly complicated.
SLS is basically just the Apollo rocket again, except without a lander. Then they’re going to dock with a space station that they haven’t built, and transfer via the space station onto a lander produce by SpaceX (although possibly there will be others), then land on the moon in the lander;and construct a permanent habitat on the moon. Presumably the space station will do something other than serve as a transfer system but I don’t really know what.
With the trump administration though it’s anyone’s guess what happens I’m assuming that they’ll probably cut funding so it won’t happen anyway.
Or perhaps another earth landing
Hmm, how about AI powered facism?
Pretty sure people invented flags long time ago.
/j
Time to make another deal with aliens to the next big jump
