[ad_1]
To his credit, Azhar duly takes note of the problems arising from the rapid transformations these technologies bring, particularly what he calls the “exponential gap.” Big tech companies like Amazon and Google gain great wealth and power from technologies. But other companies and many institutions and communities can “only adapt at an accelerating rate,” he writes. “These are lagging behind – and fast.”
Still, the enthusiasm is there.
For Azhar, the story begins in 1979 when he was seven years old in Zambia and a neighbor brought home his do-it-yourself computer kit. It then retells the familiar, yet still gripping, history of how these early products kicked off the PC revolution (an interesting side note is the description of the mostly obsolete Sinclair ZX81 – his first computer was bought for £2, so his family moved to a small town outside London years later. after moving). We know the rest. The explosion of computers (young Azeem and his family soon graduated from the Acorn BBC Master, a popular home computer in England) gave rise to the World Wide Web and now our lives are being transformed by artificial intelligence.
It’s hard to argue with the claim that computing technologies are growing exponentially. Moore’s Law has defined this type of growth for generations of technologists. As Azhar points out, that meant the cost of a transistor in 2014 was about $8 in the 1960s, but only a few billionths of a dollar. And that changed everything, fueling the rapid rise of the internet, smartphones and artificial intelligence.
Essential to Azhar’s claim for the birth of a new era is that a much broader set of technologies exhibits this exponential growth. Economists refer to key developments with broad economic implications as “general purpose technologies”; Think steam engine, electricity or the internet. Azhar suspects that cheap solar power, bioengineering techniques like synthetic biology, and 3D printing could be just such technologies.
He acknowledges that some of these technologies, especially 3D printing, are relatively immature, but argues that as prices fall, demand will increase rapidly and technologies will evolve and find markets. Azhar ends his words as follows: “In short, we are entering an age of abundance. The first period in human history when energy, food, computing and many resources would be very cheap to produce. We can meet humanity’s current needs over and over again at ever-decreasing economic cost.”
Maybe. But frankly, this extreme optimism requires a huge leap of faith in both the future power of technologies and our ability to use them effectively.
slow growth
The best measure of economic progress is productivity growth. Specifically, total factor productivity (TFP) measures the role of innovation, including both management practices and new technologies. It’s not a perfect size. But for now, it’s the best measure by which we have to estimate the impact of technologies on a country’s wealth and living standards.
Starting in the mid-2000s, TFP growth slowed In the US and many other developed countries (especially in the UK it was bad), despite the emergence of our shiny new technologies. This slowdown came after a multi-year growth spurt in the US in the late 1990s and early 2000s, when computers and the internet boosted productivity.
No one is sure what caused the troubles. Perhaps our technologies are not changing the world as much as we think, at least compared to previous innovations. In the mid-2010s, the father of techno-pessimism, Northwestern University economist Robert Gordon, showed his audience images of a famous smartphone and toilet; which would you prefer? Or perhaps we are not fully reaping the economic benefits of social media and free online services. However, the most likely answer is that many businesses and institutions are not adopting new technologies, especially in sectors such as healthcare, manufacturing and education.
Technologies that we are very impressed with, such as synthetic biology and 3D printing, go back decades. The pipeline needs constant renewal.
This is not necessarily a reason for pessimism. Maybe it will just take time. Erik Brynjolfsson, Stanford economist and a leading expert on digital technologies, said:impending productivity boomHe argues that most of the world’s advanced economies are near the bottom of a productivity J curve. Many businesses are still struggling with new technologies like AI, but as they get better at capitalizing on advances, overall productivity growth will kick in.
An optimistic approach. But it also shows that the trajectory of many new technologies is not simple. Demand is important and markets are volatile. You need to look at why people and businesses want innovation.
Let’s take synthetic biology. The idea is as simple as it is compelling: rewrite the genetic code of microorganisms, whether bacteria, yeast or algae, so they produce the chemicals or materials you want. The dream wasn’t exactly new at the time, but in the early 2000s it helped make it popular with fans, especially investors, including MIT computer scientist and biologist Tom Knight. Why not treat biology as a simple engineering challenge?
You can make plastics, chemicals and even fuels with huge fermentation vats of these programmed microbes. There would be no need for oil. Feed them sugar cane sugar and you can mass-produce everything you need.
In the late 2000s, several startups, including Amyris Biotechnologies and LS9, developed the genetics of microbes to make hydrocarbon fuels intended to replace gasoline and diesel. It seems that synthetic biology was on the verge of revolutionizing transportation. But within a few years the dream was mostly dead. Amyris is now focused on producing ingredients for skin creams and other consumer beauty products. LS9 sold its shares in 2014.
[ad_2]
Source link