Is it really that odd that "innovation" is slowing when the most lucrative professions for those with technical acumen do not further scientific knowledge, or technical capability?<p>In the 1990s the thing to do was work at a consumer website, in the 2000s it was hedge funds and finance, in the teens it was large tech companies.<p>While the technical skill required to work in any of these areas is considerable, many not involved in tech do not view the output as progress. This may be the greatest complement to those who work in Tech - or it could be a sign that the incentives for what is viewed as true innovation are misaligned.<p>That being said, as of 2021 we have the following items that would only be dreams when I was a kid.<p>- Private space companies planning mars missions within the decade.<p>- Solar and wind are the cheapest sources of energy<p>- Nearly everyone on the planet has a mobile computer connected to a broadband connection.<p>- Consumer cars can almost drive themselves in specific conditions<p>- The most desirable cars are electric and get 300 Miles per charge.<p>- Almost anything that can be done, can be done over the internet.<p>It's not quite the extreme shift from the 1940s to the 1960s, but progress is happening.
Worse is "STEAM", where art is added. That was an invention by the Rhode Island School of Art and Design. The result has been maker spaces where people make collages from construction paper, like kindergarten.[1] No need for any heavy, expensive, dangerous equipment that can make real stuff.<p>[1] <a href="https://guides.newtonfreelibrary.net/makerspace/paper" rel="nofollow">https://guides.newtonfreelibrary.net/makerspace/paper</a>
I think the fundamental reason that science and technology are so closely linked is because we really don’t know what “truth” is.<p>A scientific model is not “true” so much as it is “useful”. In a sense, general and special relativity really did not become “true” to most people until GPS. Newtonian physics really became “true” when it was used to calculate accurate artillery tables. Pasteur’s germ theory really became “true” when antiseptic surgery saved lives.<p>Without the grounding in usefulness, science as knowledge for its own sake, ends up becoming theology, where we argue about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin based on the presumed Mind of God, or whether there is a single Universe or a disparate Multiverse based on how elegant the Math becomes.
Since the 80s or so the market has made STEM subordinate to profit and power. Like so many other things, its value is now gauged by how much money it makes and how much influence it has. Thus you get machine learning in the service of targeted ad revenue and public health data forced into upholding political narratives. Meanwhile real breakthrough research like mRNA vaccines can often succumb to forces that have nothing to do with the actual value of the work.
<a href="https://www.wbur.org/commonhealth/2021/02/12/brutal-science-system-mrna-pioneer" rel="nofollow">https://www.wbur.org/commonhealth/2021/02/12/brutal-science-...</a>
The latest scientific, technological, engineering, financial innovation is becoming more ruthless, efficient, rent seeking middlemen.<p>Is it good for science that the richest, most valuable companies in the world, that are worth Trillions of dollars and generate Billions in revenue, are basically slum lords renting out some pixels on screen?<p>Is it good for society that thousands of engineering hours are spent on getting the boner pill ad faster to you by few milliseconds?
And, in addition to blurring the line between Science and Technology, there's the "STEAM" movement which just makes everything a blurry mess.
Stern's radio show only airs three times a week so I think it could seamlessly transition to a podcast. Yes, Stern would lose some of his listeners who are accustomed to listening to his show in their vehicles through the radio feature, but I doubt he cares at all. He already gave up a large portion of his audience when he left terrestrial radio for satellite back in 2006.<p>Stern's large dedicated fan base could even grow over time if his content wasn’t behind a paywall, as it is now. Though, a podcast service could elect to sell the show as a subscription knowing his fans would pay for it.