Ha! So true, although in academia we aren't so much concerned with getting products into consumers' hands; so the exact times may be different:
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Politics aside, Mrs. R. and I are real Americans in one important way. We like to shop. Not shop as in "buy." We couldn't afford that. Shop as in entertainment. We like each other's company (we've had many years to get used to it), so when we go to a new place we wander in and out of shops, looking…
Via a press release from Consumers Union, the July 2007 issue of Consumer Reports will include a call for more testing and regulation of nanotechnology:
[T]he risks of nanotechnology have been largely unexplored, and government and industry monitoring has been minimal. Moreover, consumers have…
For anyone trying to make a living at blogging, including our Seed Media Overlords, one of the major hurdles is the poor pay of internet advertising compared to magazine and newspaper advertising. This is an accurate assessment of the problem (italics mine):
I think the evidence for this dynamic…
Libertarians hold dear the idea of the uberman consumer, the hyperrational, fully formed autonomous being that springs from the womb to take good decisions in the marketplace. But when one reads marketing literature, a different consumer is encountered. Often this consumer is an object to be…
Which of these categories do those miracle treatments using stem cells fall under?
And which category does AGW fall into?
I always figured that when someone said "we will have X in 10 years" that 10 years meant indefinite future. See, AIDS vaccines, Stem Cells to cure anything, flying cars, etc.
"Strong AI" (a phrase I hate) definitely falls into the "it has not been conclusively proven impossible" category. As it happens, 20-25 years is the usual estimate AI researchers give journalists.
Knowing xkcd, Randall Munroe probably noticed that too.
TomB, AGW isn't a technology.
AGW is already happening. In case someone didn't know.
Regarding the last point, yeah, it seems like pure research without application is the area that really allows applications to be built.
I love the history of forecasts about controlled fusion power. In the 60s physicists (notably Teller and Dyson) often claimed it was 20 years away. In the 70s it was 25 years away. In the 80s it was 30 years away. In the 90s it was 40 years away. Last I heard (2005 or so), it was 50 years away. Perhaps we should stop funding research into controlled fusion power before it gets any further away.
As far as controlled fusion goes.. given the pathetic amount of funding compared to the potential benefits it's not surprising.
Mind you, breeder reactors in various forms - which are a technology capable of stopping AGW with minimal end-user impact - have been around for decades without actually getting used.
minor quibble: When posting an XKCD comic, you should also post the "alt" tag he supplies, as that often contains more silliness.