Slashdot Mirror
World's First Encyclopedia of Future Inventions
Deb Hellman writes "WIRED Magazine Writers, Cory Doctorow and Wil McCarthy, have joined VC Rick Patch and 2 futurists to judge the Immortalizer Technologies Project - a project designed to uncover a comprehensive list of future inventions. The project is being spearheaded by a futurist think-tank, the DaVinci Institute. The goal of the project is to create a compendium of future inventions, a roadmap of sorts for innovators. They probably won't get it right in the first edition, but I like how Tom Frey is thinking on this one. People can submit their ideas and have a future invention named after themselves. Deadline for submissions is April 30th."
It's one thing to say "gosh, I wish there was a device that did such-and-such, I could really use something like that." It's another to say "In 10 years, we will have this and that invention." and it being dead wrong 95 percent (or more) of the time.
Yippie! Venture capital and futurists. Two great tastes that get nothing done together! Don't we ever learn. It is the year 2003 and yet no hover car in every garage, jet packs the realm of a few weirdos, and my computer's cooling system sounds like a malfunctioning jet engine. Why don't we finish the work of the futurists from 50 years ago first?
People can submit their ideas and have a future invention named after themselves.
If someone thinks something up and puts in in a book, and then 100 years later I actually make the stupid thing, then I'm pretty sure I get to call it whatever I, or the marketing department, want to call it.
"Not knowing when the dawn will come, I open every door." - Emily Dickinson
a safe, handy tool for disposing of whatever sadistic bastard came up with the molded-plastic clamshell packaging that too many smallish products come in?
Bonus points if it also opens the stupid %$#@ packages themselves, without leaving finger-cutting edges, and double bonus if it leaves the package in a state where the thing can be returned to the store if unsatisfactory.
timothy
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
People had the idea of flying machines long before the Wright brothers came along and invented one - and you know what? it didn't involve feathers or an archimedes screw. And people had the idea of mechanical musical instruments long before any were invented, but they were often imagined to be similar to mechanical musicians playing existing or modified instruments rather than, say, an electronic synthesizer.
The point is, having the general idea doesn't in any way diminish the innovation of the actual workable implementation; the ancients who imagined themselves flying like birds using some aparatus doesn't at all take away from the Wright brothers.
must... stay... awake...
The problem is, that knowledge is quite seperate from experience. And experience not only influences what we know, but what we do with our knowledge, and how we grow. If we copied actual memories, then we're left with a bunch of clones with less personal development.
Think about when Einstein's theories led to the creation of atomic energy sources. Think about what others did with it (nukes). Einstein lacked the comprehension of the sheer evil this knowledge could impart, while others lacked the caution of experience and upbringing.
How about giving a 12-year-old knowledge which would let him build a death-ray? How about giving a 6-year-old knowledge of sex? Even with useful things, like math/english/physics, knowledge would be more useful to some than others.
Seriously. How many of us could read a book, understand the concepts, but completely screw up on the implentation? Knowledge is one thing: skill, ability, and experience are completely different.
I totally agree. People have trouble enough maneuvering in 2 dimensions, then they want to add a 3rd dimension of movement? I shudder to think of the accidents caused people flying to work, while they drink their coffee, read their papers, and use their cell phones...