'Old people' spend their entire lives making a dream come reality, technologically. That gets called innovation. I don't see how this is an old vs young thing either.
My issue is impatient technology shifts. Pushing an all-encompassing standard(that is meant to be universal for a 10-30 year generational life span) onto the end users. Instead, a standard that would be considered
a massive technological breakthrough in comparison, is barely production ready and a year out. A measly year out. Gotta live with it for 10-30 years, wait the fucking year, sometimes just a few months.
I always thought it was funny that the largest user base of vinyl in 2016 was the 20-30 demographic. They were simply brushed off as hipsters, but most of them weren't aside from having an interest in records. Technology doesn't move forward like it's some democracy, it just happens regardless, and if people reflect on the past, that also happens among all generations, old and young, past and future. Not only that, they look back for a reason, something was lost. It's a check and balance, culturally. Maybe not the best example, but here's one off the top of my head. Like the peak fidelity of some vinyl compared to CD releases of the same albums, not the pops and hisses(BTW, very easy to eliminate), went missing for many many years. So did the warmth of analog(which makes sense, because digital is merely a repeatable capture of an analog signal in this context.) Just using the vinyl example, because at this point people are familiar with it. But there are other examples. IMO, it's when technology is centrally manipulated, and we consider that "moving forward", that society is cheated.
Bluray won vs HD-DVD, but
neither should have won, that was strong armed onto the public. And as time goes on, we see how wrong we were for buying into the hype. Instead of 50gb discs with 50gb of heavily compressed content as well as serving as a backup, we would have had (realistically, not just shooting for max capacities) 2,000gb discs(theoretically rated at a 6,000gb max, where bluray maxes at 250gb theoretically). Netflix doesn't stream anywhere NEAR 33+GB/s(23.5
MB/s is their physical limit, so you lose a ton of quality, also a VERY apples
ranges comparison to brush off streaming as a replacement, because that mostly makes sense due to how limited bluray is), but a HVD allows for the streaming to be maxed out with each generation of video data bus, theoretically 400GB/s. And all we needed to do was reject Bluray, wait ONE YEAR, and it would have been the market standard. Entire bluray sets for TV shows, movie trilogies, music albums UNCOMPRESSED, could be released. It would also have kept up with piracy for much longer, because nobody has the bandwidth to serve these ISOs.
Don't get me started on CFL bulbs, especially when LED WAS on the market, just needed another year(which was proven with the Lime Energy acquisition who had an unfunded assembly model that blew away GE's lobby manipulated CFL lines). The whole CFL push delayed LED 4 years. Who was cheated? Now we have a serious environmental issue on our hands with handling the bulbs. Fucking genius.
The next big thing in computing is CNT layering on lithographed silicon wafer. Then it will be 20-50 years of CNT development when computing standards shift, and some form of FPGA can handle legacy(what we consider latest and greatest today). I can't wait for CNT transistors. But you have a few academics that want to force a specific form of quantum computing onto everyone as the next major standard. SO guess what, wait 3 years, we're all ready to get cheated again. But you know what, your device will have a little quantum co-processor, run faster, and bobs your uncle, be super happy with the new tech. But realistically speaking, that is going to **** us hard for 20 years. Hell, the bulk of China runs MIPs systems, so they may adopt the superior standard, and regardless of political agenda, it would be a consumer and hype-marketing move that would put us at a massive disadvantage in computing performance and development.
But people are worried about self driving cars taking over. In reality, a self driving car is more of a regulatory hurdle than a technological one. It's not all that grand. Case in point, agricultural management systems that are fully automated with a severely outdated computer the size of a six-pack of beer that have been in service for decades now. Sure, a road has more variables, but if in in the mid 1980s I can plot, plow, plant, harvest thousands of acres with obstacles at a lower rate of error than humans, then double that scale of obstacles every 2 years for 30 years, the self-driving car is really nothing in comparison.
