MIT Picks Top 10 Emerging Technologies
DeviceGuru writes "MIT's Technology Review magazine has just published its annual list of the top ten emerging technologies. Dubbed the TR10, these revolutionary innovations are poised to have a dramatic impact on computing, medicine, nanotechnology, our energy infrastructure, and more, say the magazine's editors. The TR10 technologies this time around are: cellulolytic enzymes, reality mining, connectomics, offline web apps, graphene transistors, atomic magnetometers, wireless power, nanoradio, probabilistic chips, modeling surprise. More details on the TR10 appear in the March/April edition of Technology Review."
hasn't this been posted before?
Read the original, then steal all the best quotes and look like a genius...
Offline web applications, aka applications...
This is somewhat old news. The nanoradio is probably picoradio by now.
It's equally relevant....
"Be light, stinging, insolent and melancholy"
just RTFA
Worst BBC News Stories
Is this so much the top 10 emerging technologies, or what TR find interesting?
"emerging" is ambiguous - does it mean technologies that will have a definite effect on our way of life, technologies that show promise as maybe some day becoming useful, or...? This seems a little hit and miss to me, although I guess by definition it has to be.
The Mothership
Probably last year.
Everything on that list is either evolutionary technology (growth down some already determined path) or lame. Some are both.
... too early to tell how it'll sort itself out.
Here's my take:
Cellulolytic enzymes -- we already (a) have some that work and (b) use them to process biomass into biofuel. Better ones are of course great, but this is an evolution...
Reality mining -- What a douch-bag term. Devices watch your every move and report helpful hints to the government -- er, I mean you.
Connectomics -- Brain wiring diagrams. Neat, but it's too soon to tell if it'll reveal anything exciting.
Offline Web applications -- I've got an idea, instead of running my offline web app in a browser, let's cut out that part and run it with native system libraries. Okay, now lets deliver the application through a simple package system. I'll call this "dpkg"! (Alternative smart-ass comment: Oh, you mean Java?)
Graphene transistors -- Damn cool. But we have transistors. These are just smaller transistors. Evolutionary.
Atomic magnetometers -- Really small sensors are neat. Lose the "war on terror" retoric in the summary. These might actually allow some neat things, but it's a bit early to say.
Wireless power -- People have wanted to do this for a while, but all comers so far have big losses associated with them. Why, in a power-short future, would we be doing this?
Nanoradio -- Nifty. Especially if used for communication between multiple tiny machines
Probabilistic chips -- Right. So lets run our calculation enough times that we can have good statistics about the mean result and the standard deviation. Wait, now we've lost out power savings?
Modeling surprise -- Douche-baggery.
Look, my main point is that we can't predict revolutions in science and technology. All we can do is say advance x will help with problem y, but that's evolutionary thinking. Revolutions, by their very nature, cause huge changes in what people do and what they think can be done. You can't predict it ahead of time. We've gotten very good at grinding away at the next evolutionary step in technology, and that's really neat. Many of the ideas above have exciting applications. But I really hate the "revolutionary" and "disruptive" technology ideas.
Use the Firehose to mod down Second Life stories!
And I work in medical genetics and follow new technologies in energy and other fields, so I think somebody just did a braindump without thinking about what the implications are, quite frankly.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
I might be missing something but what exactly does this story say that wasn't said 1 month ago? it even links to the same article...
[...]
Nanoradio -- Nifty. Especially if used for communication between multiple tiny machines
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
All this does is move the goal post. It's crap. Insurance companies will dump millions into it only to find that surprises still happen. Hurricanes plow into cities. Cities drown. The govt is too incompetent to help, so it farms it all out to their buddies in related industries. Naomi Wolf can tell you how such Modeling surprise ideas would work for Certain People.
Probabilistic Chips
This is not revolutionary or even interesting, as we teeter on the brink of optical computing.
NanoRadio
Great. Now head lice can listen to Coldplay. I'm so happy I could just plotz.
Wireless Power
Great. Plug in the cellphone, go to bed and the thing will zap bugs all night. And your cat.
Atomic Magnetometers
Fine - piss all this money into that, but defund free clinics, let people die from treatable diseases, etc. jusst because they're uninsured. Frankly, I could do with a little more focus on basic preventive health and health maintenance work, and a little less medical techno heroics. the tech stuff is easy because you don't have to care. dealing with some pregnant 14 year old from the ghetto, now that takes some attention...
Offline Web Applications
Oh lordy bullshit. It's just Adobe trying to find ways to keep people from stealing photoshop.
Graphene Transistors
But will it make my porn look better?
Connectomics Wanna get rid of autism? Don't let a kid watch TV or use a video game until he's 10. That would clear up a good 20% of the autism AND ADHD cases would disappear. The rest of the autistics? They're tards. It's why we invented factories and WalMart. They need to work somewhere.
Reality Mining
Ummm yeah - and considering the govt is reviving the Big Brother Machine it'll be so much easier to monitor your every thought, and you can change your name to THX1138, or LUH1734 if you're a girl...
Cellulolytic Enzymes
Sure - until some tiny bacteria crittur finds it tasty and infects the vats. Biofuels = genocide.
So that about raps it up for this years techno wankfest. Thanks for tuning in! Come back next year for yet another pile of misguided wishful thinking posing as science. Til then, buh bye!
RS
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
Just one paragraph given to the skeptics. http://www.technologyreview.com/Infotech/12264/?a=f
I have never seen their magazine before but this is basically just an advertisement to get people to subscribe. I get the marketing value of it but usually Slashdot folks see through this sort of thing.
I really dont understand this. Out of pure speculation ,it seems to me that taping the sap from a live tree and turning that into biofuel would be more practical ????? Please comment ...
TR is (has become?) a promotion rag, and Jason Pontin is a douche.
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
Nikola Tesla would be proud. People havent given up on what made him broke. You can get some of the story on what he did over at the Mind Course page. Amazing to think what was "radical" back then is now "the next big thing" today. Sad.
Procrastinating life a way at a rapid rate of speed.
To start with, I'm not sure how the magnetometer guy is going to revolutionize MRI. The signal recorded in MRI isn't magnetic, it's a radio signal. I suppose you could detect that with a good enough magnetometer, but would it be worth it? A coil of wire is awfully sensitive. The magnet is used to produce the signal, and a magnetometer doesn't help you do that. The big magnets are needed to produce a stronger signal, which gives you a better signal to noise ratio.
The probabilistic processors extending battery life by a factor of 10? I don't think the processor in my notebook uses 90% of the power anyway, so even if you dropped its power consumption to zero you're still not going to get a factor of 10. Reducing the voltage of a few circuits that calculate least significant bits isn't going to come anywhere near reducing a processor's power usage to zero. Maybe they meant 10%? Or 1%?
I liye thet ideb. Msre pow4r t8 Dr' Salem!
Table-ized A.I.
Where's my friggin flying car??!!!
Have gnu, will travel.
Well, I can't see surprise (or surprisal as it is also known) as a major breakthrough, at least not in cognitive psychology. All it does it tell you how far something (e.g. a word) deviates from some (corpus based) expectation. It does provide another way of looking at things like reading times and difficulty of sentences, but it is just another measure of something like relevance, probability (actually, surprisal is defined as the -log of the conditional probability of an event, just like in information theory).
The traffic example in the link is a cute application, but not really what something that will have a dramatic impact on computing. It's probably in the list because they got one example from 10 different disciplines, so nobody would feel left behind...
Reality mining? Offline web apps? Surprise modeling? OMG!! Microsoft researchers!? How did microsoft get in there!!! Maybe their work was lacking surprise. What next, XML2?
People are seriously working on about six of those thirty topics. 20% hit rate.
Hmmm. Pretty soon all we'll need are these computers, let's call them "workstations", that have local storage for running applications faster and ...
;-)
Where have I seen this before?
> The TR10 technologies this time around are: cellulolytic enzymes, reality mining,
> connectomics, offline web apps, graphene transistors, atomic magnetometers, wireless
> power, nanoradio, probabilistic chips, modeling surprise.
No flesh clones of Sandra Bullock, with an AI brain programmed to love me, deeply and physically love me?
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Old Sews is no News
This will become the new "Vaporware" list.
Probabilistic chips are essentially analog. In the analog world; the hiss is the inaccuracy in the least-significant digits.
No, I will not work for your startup