 |
| |
 |
| |
|
| |
 |
The
history of the 20’th century is full of overoptimistic
technoprophecies. How many sci-fi authors of the 50’s
believed that by 2002 we’d be zipping over the rooftops
of New York skyscrapers in little Jetsons-style spacecraft?
What about Orwell’s vision of 1984?
On the other hand, it’s easy to forget how outlandish
today’s technologies would have seemed to the average
person of 100, 50 or in some cases even 10 or 20 years ago.
Nanotechnology pioneer and futurist Ralph Merkle, on his
website, has collected a highly amusing collection of erroneously
pessimistic quotes about future technology , many of which
were originally taken from a Congressional Research Report
on Erroneous Predictions and Negative Comments Concerning
Scientific and Technological Developments. I think it is
appropriate to close this book with a sampling of my favorite
items from his collection.
The poor performance of past prognosticators indicates just
how hard it is to project the exactly trajectory of progress.
On the other hand, those who projected interstellar space
travel by 2000, but no computers or lasers or video games,
might not be too disappointed when the saw the amazing array
of technologies we have around us to day. The fact of tremendous
progress is easy to project even if the details are not,
and the closer we get to the Singularity, the more accurate
the optimists will be as compared to the pessimists.
Read these examples – and tell me again that real
AI is impossible, or 1000 years off. Tell me again that
the death of the human body is inevitable because it’s
the natural way of things. Tell me again that building novel
forms of matter to order is a pipe dream. Tell me again
… well, you get the idea. Tell me again why it’s
better to hide our collective heads in the sand, and confront
new discoveries only as they emerge each year -- than to
face the inevitability of the Singularity and apply our
hearts, minds and souls toward maximizing the odds that
the revolution we’re creating will come out for the
best for everyone…..
“Outside
of the proven impossible, there probably can be found no
better example of the speculative tendency carrying man
to the verge of the chimerical than in his attempts to imitate
the birds, or no field where so much inventive seed has
been sown with so little return as in the attempts of man
to fly successfully through the air. Never, it would seem,
has the human mind so persistently evaded the issue, begged
the questions and, 'wrangling resolutely with the facts',
insisted upon dreams being accepted as actual performance,
as when there has been proclaimed time and again the proximate
and perfect utility of the balloon or of the flying machine."
"...Should
man succeed in building a machine small enough to fly and
large enough to carry himself, then in attempting to build
a still larger machine he will find himself limited by the
strength of his materials in the same manner and for the
same reasons that nature has."
Melville, Rear Admiral George W. The Engineer and the Problem
of Aerial Navigation. North American Review, December 1901.
pp. 820, 825, 830-831.
The
astronomer, William H. Pickering, said:
"...The popular mind often pictures gigantic flying
machines speeding across the Atlantic and carrying innumerable
passengers in a way analogous to our modern steamships...It
seems safe to say that such ideas must be wholly visionary,
and even if a machine could get across with one or two passengers
the expense would be prohibitive to any but the capitalist
who could own his own yacht. Another popular fallacy is
to expect enormous speed to be obtained. It must be remembered
that the resistance of the air increases as the square of
the speed and thework as the cube...If with 30 h.p. we can
now attain a speed of 40 m.p.h., then in order to reach
a speed of 100 m.p.h., we must use a motor capable of 470
h.p...it is clear that with our present devices there is
no hope of competing for racing speed with either our locomotives
or our automobiles."
Clarke, Arthur C. Profiles of the Future. New York, Harper
and Row, 1962. pp.3-4.
"The
day of the battleship has not passed, and it is highly unlikely
that an airplane, or fleet of them, could ever successfully
sink a fleet of Navy vessels under battle conditions."
Woods, Ralph L. "Prophets Can Be Right and Prophets
Can Be Wrong." American Legion Magazine, October 1966.
p. 29
Thomas
Edison advocated his own DC based power system, and didn’t
much care for Tesla’s invention of AC current:
"There
is no plea which will justify the use of high-tension and
alternating currents, either in a scientific or a commercial
sense. They are employed solely to reduce investment in
copper wire and real estate."
"...My
personal desire would be to prohibit entirely the use of
alternating currents. They are unnecessary as they are dangerous...I
can therefore see no justification for the introduction
of a system which has no element of permanency and every
elements of danger to life and property."
"...I
have always consistently opposed high-tension and alternating
systems of electric lighting...not only on account of danger,
but because of their general unreliability and unsuitability
for any general system of distribution."
Edison, Thomas A. The Dangers of Electric Lighting, North
American Review, November, 1889. pp.630, 632, 633.
Robert
H. Goddard, the rocketry pioneer, sought funding from the
U.S. Army Air Corps, in 1941. A quote from the rejection
letter is as follows:
"The
proposals as outlined in your letter...have been carefully
reviewed...While the Air Corps is deeply interested in the
research work being carried out by your organization...it
does not, at this time, feel justified in obligating further
funds for basic jet propulsion research and experimentation..."
"The
actual building of roads devoted to motor cars is not for
the near future, in spite of many rumors to that effect."
Harpers Weekly, August 2, 1902. p. 1046.
Henry
L. Ellsworth, U. S., Commissioner of Patents, said in 1844:
"...The
advancement of the arts from year to year taxes our credulity
and seems to presage the arrival of that period when further
improvements must end."
Woods, Ralph L. Prophets Can be Right and Prophets Can be
Wrong. American Legion Magazine, October 1966. p. 29
Alfred
Velpeau, an esteemed surgeon, declared in 1839:
"The
abolishment of pain in surgery is a chimera. It is absurd
to go on seeking it today. 'Knife' and 'pain' are two words
in surgery that must forever be associated in the consciousness
of the patient. To this compulsory combination we shall
have to adjust ourselves."
Gumpert, Martin. Trail-Blazers of Science. New York, Funk
and Wagnalls Company, 1936. p. 232.
Sir
John Erichsen (1873), tells us:
"There
cannot always be fresh fields of conquest by the knife;
there must be portions of the human frame that will ever
remain sacred from its intrusions, at least in the surgeon's
hands. That we have already, if not quite, reached these
final limits, there can be little question. The abdomen,
the chest, and the brain will be forever shut from the intrusion
of the wise and humane surgeon."
Adm.
William Leahy told President Truman in 1945:
"That
is the biggest fool thing we have ever done...The bomb will
never go off, and I speak as an expert in explosives."
Truman, Harry D. Memoirs, Vol I: Year of Decisions, Garden
City, Doubleday and Company, Inc., 1955. p. 11.
The
key device that makes long-distance radio broadcasting feasible
is the audion tube, invented by Lee de Forest in the early
1900’s. de Forest was an entrepreneur as well as an
inventor, and founded a company, the Radio Telephone Company,
intended to create and market long-distance radio technology.
When he tried to sell stock in the company, he was brought
to trial for fraud. The DA, in the course of the trial,
declared that:
"De
Forest has said in many newspapers and over his signature
that it would be possible to transmit human voice across
the Atlantic before many years. Based on these absurd and
deliberately misleading statements, the misguided public...has
been persuaded to purchase stock in his company..."
Though
he was acquitted, the judge was not convinced his efforts
were worthwhile, and gave de Forest the same advice that
many other technology and science pioneers have heard from
their friends and family:
"to
get a common garden variety of job and stick to it."
Archer, L. History of Radio. New York, American Historical
Society, 1938. p. 110.
|
