mlatorra at gmail.com
Tue Oct 23 21:14:38 UTC 2012
Looking backward at yesterday's predictions for today is always interesting
and often quite humbling.
Anders, what is the title of the book by Ayers from 1970 that you referred
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 7:27 AM, Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:
> On 22/10/2012 17:19, David Lubkin wrote:
>> (We suspect you've noticed that all those things that were predicted to go
>>> away are all still alive and well. So much for that prediction.)
> Beautiful. Simply beautiful.
> The big problem with predicting the future is that even when you get the
> analysis right, it might still take far longer than you expect for it to
> come true. I am reading a book on technology forecasting by Ayer from 1970
> that among other things mentions the failure of "radar owens" (microwaves),
> suggesting they were 'a flash in the pan'. No, it just took 15 years longer
> (and the introduction of the rotary plate) for them to become ubiqitious.
> (Ayer also skewers using performance curve envelopes in a way that sounds
> perfectly applicable to Kurzweil critics today. All in all, a pretty good
> book - reading old futurology books is always helpful, since you can see
> what methods actually did make the right predictions and why. )
> Anders Sandberg,
> Future of Humanity Institute
> Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat