Is technological progress speeding up or slowing down?

Is technological progress speeding up or slowing down?

I would say it's slowing down to the point where "progress" is being measured by how much internet connectivity we can we weave into a small space. There are great strides being made in the technology that we have but nobodies "re-inventing" the computer, no ground-breaking inventions that change our way of life or advance us into the future are coming out. I think we're coming close to the limits of technology. I don't know if we'll ever be able to colonize other planets or prolong human life or create gravity defying machines.

Here's one objective metric.

By this metric, tech advances are speeding up greatly.

Patents are as much an indicator of local legality as actual new developments.

>patents consist exclusively of """technological advancements"""
>its totally not just hack inventors and get-rich-quick schemers developing slight variations of existing products that will never be used

this shit is on par with the end of history meme in the 90's

Most of these patents are junk like how to fit more dicks in your ass

Technological progress is continuing quite rapidly, but 1968 to 2018 was nothing like 1918 to 1968 in terms of more "output" oriented metrics like gdp per capita.

>actual hard number is invalid
>my own gut and feeling is the true indicator of technological progress

>What is quantum computing

I know user, you tell me

Its speeding up, but on for the rich ones

I dont* know

A meme.

won't work

It's difficult to get people to accept an entirely new way of operating when they don't consider the technology they have now to be limiting, progress for it's own sake is meaningless.
We haven't yet invented all we can with our current understanding of science, quantum computing and the block chain may be those revolutions.

It has dramatically slowed down since 08. Only a fool couldn't see this.

Entirely new shit that changes everything is also expensive for other companies.
Some user a while back on /g/ mentioned how processors are hitting a point where they can't get smaller, plus all the gold and shit that goes in them is going to eventually run out in the far future.
As
For block chains, I think the most significant one was the one Diago pulled off in evo 2015 against that crazy mix up.

Source?

>statistics can't be flawed because they are numbers

Depends on what you mean by progress. Technological/scientific discovery has exploded in the past decade, but adoption has pretty much ground to a halt because most new shit is incredibly expensive and capitalists have no reason to invest in it (yet).

Mmmm I don't know, a hundred years there weren't supermarkets, most people didn't own a car, there weren't tvs or telephones, no airlines, no internet, well what do you think?

The absolute state of positivists

Literally by 1970 all those thing were firmly in place, that's 50 years ago.

We literally haven't even gotten better at treating cancer since the 1970s

>in terms of more "output" oriented metrics like gdp per capita
yeah no shit because in 1918 the average Westerner was still a pig farmer dying from tooth disease. Of course the gap between him and 1968 man is greater than 1968 to today

>We literally haven't even gotten better at treating cancer since the 1970s

quantum computers are just around the corner
machine learning and neural networks are changing everything, down to the manner in which we build our social interactions
ITER in 20 years, mark my words
a whole new branch of astrophysics has just started with the success of LIGO
commercial space operations are becoming a standard
that and a lot more and new technologies are enabling us to pull the remaining 5-6 billion people out of poverty and onto our level, faster every day

fucking retard

We have. It's just that Amerimutts cannot afford it

Americans actually have the highest rates of cancer survival in the world, even if it is expensive they do live through it.

we don't refuse life-saving care to people who can't afford it in America, we just ruin them financially and put them in debt for the rest of their lives.

Actually in the past few years immunotherapy has proven to be quite effective.

Theoretical sciences aren't progressing as fast as they did in the last century.

>but adoption has pretty much ground to a halt because most new shit is incredibly expensive and capitalists have no reason to invest in it (yet).

Counter proposal: inequality is fucking things up rather than capitalists being lazy cowards. Most of what is supposed to be the middle class is tapped out trying to cover ever expanding housing, job/school, and healthcare (America) prices.

Mass adoption is key but the step between rich dilettante to common man doesn't much exist like it used to. We saw this with 3D TV, though people deny it with excuses. We are seeing it more definitively with VR, I think. People just don't have the money to spend $800 on a novel luxery hardware. They have just enough to get by with the lifestyle they know, there's no more room to dig out for something new.

We're still flying around on planes that are based on over 70 year old design.

>VR
>not a meme
The average person is poor as fuck, half of americans live paycheck to paycheck. Why should buying a kiddie game vr goggles be an indicator of wealth? Autist.

Neither it completly stopped since the 70s

yeah not to mention my spoon is almost identical to ancient Egyptian spoons. Idiocracy was right

I don't know about you reddit but this spoon looks uncomfortable af to eat out of.

>based on over 70 year old design
what the fuck does that even mean. Two wings and a tail? Internal combustion engine? Were you expecting anti-gravity flying limos by 2018?

NASA tier reasoning

>Were you expecting anti-gravity flying limos by 2018?

No, but we''re not only not able to go to moon anymore, also we're not able to fly supersonic.

>not able to go to moon anymore
wrong, we can probably do it quicker and safer but the US-USSR dckwaving ended so no blank checks for space tech anymore

>also we're not able to fly supersonic
it was a money sink in the 70s and the fact that it's still not implemented now when it would cost less tells you how much of a stunt it was

basically - don't fall for marketing. It's like saying that Elon Musk put a car in space so if by 2030 nobody else has done it we'd have regressed

>quantum computers are just around the corner
I read a Michael Crichton book recently from 1999 (almost 20 years ago) based on the idea that quantum computing was right around the corner.

>machine learning and neural networks are changing everything, down to the manner in which we build our social interactions
Machine learning and AI is a meme. It's on a quixotic wrong headed path that will hit a wall because it's based bad fundamentals and wishful thinking.

>commercial space operations are becoming a standard
Also a meme and actually a disturbing sign of modern technological regression. We started space exploration in the 60s and have failed to build upon or even repeat these feats 50 years later.

"commercial spacer flight" is a currently hypothetical struggling operation to do now what we did then. I read once about their rocket problems and I was shocked to find out they actually try to make it work by refurbishing old USSR rocket parts. Would you reuse a computer mainframe from the 60s if you wanted to make a big computing project do "wonders"?

What happens when they run out of old USSR surplus to gank? Apparently what won't happen is develop and manufacture new, more efficient and economical rocket techology on their own. Nor will there be a healthy NASA to make new spaceship technology instead, because now we have wonderful "commercial" space operations taking its place. Nor a Soviet Space Program, on account of not existing anymore.

>that and a lot more and new technologies are enabling us to pull the remaining 5-6 billion people out of poverty and onto our level, faster every day
Ever ask yourself why poverty exists in the first place, or where it comes from? Hint: not a lack of resources. America has more empty homes than homeless.

>We started space exploration in the 60s and have failed to build upon or even repeat these feats 50 years later.
space exploration before the 21st century was nothing but a politically charged penis measuring contest with two nations throwing billions at the issue with no expected financial return whatsoever. It's not shocking to me that the private sector is just now considering the idea when it might actually be a feasible investment

>Ever ask yourself why poverty exists in the first place
on a macro scale - population with 0 education accepting their lot as cattle being ruled by some warlord who is convenient for the large powers so they prop him up. On a micro scale, depression and drug addiction

This sounds very much like China Empire in 1400s
>We could explore whole world and build any kind of vessel we want but we won't because it's waste of time and money.
This will not end very well.

>China didn't explore the world because they couldn't justify it economically
>Europe did because their merchants wanted more gold, slaves, spices and a way around the Ottomans
>private interests drive progress once again
makes sense to me

The real reason Europe did is because it had a more innovate culture. Both western and Chinese merchants are equally greedy.

And the likely unPC core reason Europe had a more innovative culture is because Europeans are genetically more creative and liberal minded than east asians, even if they're not quite as smart.

well then, we'll have to rely on the more innovative people to drive space exploration. I still don't agree remotely that we're regressing technologically - we're just focused on tech that gives a return

>And the likely unPC core reason Europe had a more innovative culture is because Europeans are genetically more creative and liberal minded than east asians, even if they're not quite as smart.
Did you conclude that from your extensive study of the creative gene, which is totally a thing that exists, mr race scientist?