Innovation Stagnation?
Adam, I'm
Speaker 2:sorry. Oh, for tonight. I thought you were apologizing for earlier because I I wanted to get just get this off my chest that you Sure. Humbled me. I think you got, like, a a fatality a meeting fatality.
Speaker 2:I think that everyone knows that sidebar
Speaker 1:meeting fatality. Oh, god. It was great. I think I think everyone
Speaker 2:knows that sidebar conversations happen during meetings. You DM'd me during a meeting in a way that just murdered me. Like, I had to like, I had giggle fits and needed to turn off my camera.
Speaker 1:Oh, it's true.
Speaker 2:And then I turned my camera back on, but the message was still on the screen and I was back in giggle fence.
Speaker 1:You're back in giggle now. So then you're giggling so much I started giggling. I mean, it was I definitely I felt like the bomb maker was I kinda, like, lost a hand in the
Speaker 2:pocket. Yourself out.
Speaker 1:Yeah. Absolutely taking myself out. Yeah. No. That was just, it was a little too much giggling.
Speaker 2:Yeah. And it's just to get that off my chest.
Speaker 1:It won't. There we go. This I was not expecting that, actually. I was not expecting the when I you know, because you always do this for a little bit of reaction. They have a little bit of a Yeah.
Speaker 2:You know, little bit of
Speaker 1:a smart ass remark. And then I looked at him, like, oh my god. He's reading something. Oh oh my god. I think he's actually oh, I think I've got it.
Speaker 2:He he is dead. Right? I have won this meeting.
Speaker 1:I have won I've won this meeting. It took 4 years to get here. I I mean, I feel that's, all good. You know, I'm not gonna lie. I feel like, you know, a little bit a bit like, Killer Mike and the Grammy's last night.
Speaker 1:I kinda felt like I swept it. I felt, you know, finally, age 50. Like, don't give up on yourselves, folks. Like, you
Speaker 2:can It's just like that.
Speaker 1:It's exactly like that. It's exactly like that's what everyone was telling me. Oh, wait a minute. Yeah.
Speaker 2:That's right.
Speaker 1:That's not what it was talking to me.
Speaker 2:So But but where are we? How do we get here?
Speaker 1:Yeah. This this is what I do apologize for. I I'm just I'm sorry. And I think you would be right to ask about what do you think you're sorry for? Is this Yeah.
Speaker 2:Yeah. No. It feels feels like conversations I've had with my children. Yes.
Speaker 1:Right. Which is the usual response I get when I like. There's actually there there are there are actually quite a few things you could be apologizing for and I actually don't know which one you think you're referring to. But I know
Speaker 2:Just narrow it down a little. Right. Narrow it
Speaker 1:down a little And I know whatever this is is gonna be very underwhelming. I think and I've been reflecting on this. Like, am I sorry that we're here? Or am I sorry that I'm not sorry? And that might or might be that.
Speaker 1:I am and for that, like, I'm not total, like, a 100% remorse. I've I'm very like, the fact that, like, why are we here? Why are we getting frowled by by the Internet? You know? And why do I not have the ability to, like, resist it?
Speaker 1:Where's my you know, and there was, it was actually interesting to read the comments. There's some people who are like, you need to you you gotta fight this. Like, come on.
Speaker 2:You know? You mean people saying, you're better than this, and you saying, the heck I am. I'm not better than this. This is exactly
Speaker 1:how I am. A free b s d frow on the on on Twitter. I followed for many years, mutual for many years. And Frebes DeFrau was like, fight the temptation, like, you know, and I and I'm sorry, Frebes DeFrau. I I have failed I failed you, but more importantly, I have failed myself.
Speaker 1:I failed us all. I really feel like I just yeah. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Like, why do we what what is it about the troll?
Speaker 1:Why does one get trolled? And I know Adam on this, and then there were other people who are like, oh, this is okay. Great. We're gonna take in we're taking Nate Silver tweets now. Is this is this an oxide and friends equivalent of a clip show, Adam?
Speaker 1:Are we
Speaker 2:Pretty accurate.
Speaker 1:This is just like, oh my god. Like, lazy writers. It's like, oh, and oh, who's the guest? Oh, no one's the guest? You guys just read an Nate Silver tweet and get trolled over it.
Speaker 1:Okay. Like, this is entertainment now? Yeah. I'm sorry.
Speaker 2:Fonzie, get ready to jump over that shark.
Speaker 1:Absolutely. Look. I'm sorry. The the writers were on strike. Actually, we had a we actually do some really good shows in the works, like, better than this one.
Speaker 2:Actually, dear listener. Actually, dear listener,
Speaker 1:don't don't give up on us. Please don't give up on us the way we have given up on ourselves. Please please stay with us. No. We got some really good stuff, but we got, you know, we we got some some exciting guests, and we just haven't quite lined them all up.
Speaker 1:And in part in part because I understand that we have guests that now would like more than 4 hours of notice before they appear. We're just like, oh, okay. Alright. Well, that will give more than 4 hours notice. So anyway, so, we we we this is not gonna be every week.
Speaker 1:I feel it is like once a quarter. I was trying to think, what is the cadence? Is that is that a is that a reasonable I think it's just thinking back
Speaker 2:to we had an episode called Trolltron Assemble, which, the stats do not, reflect on favorably. I'm just, you know, just mentioning now.
Speaker 1:Oh, god. I I I think I see why we're having this 1 on 1. Okay. Yeah. Okay.
Speaker 1:Yeah. I see this graph you put in front of me. I don't know. What is the oh, that's what it is. Okay.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Yeah. But, yeah, quarterly sounds about right.
Speaker 1:Well, so but, you know, I not that I'm gonna do it for the street, but that but that ended up that was the Sam Altman tweet that I ended up putting into that. That was the the coming of age talk.
Speaker 2:Yeah. That's true. Oh, I'd forgotten what it was about. But yeah.
Speaker 1:Which I which I stapled into, like, I, you know, I kinda, like, recovered my balance and turned it into a halfway decent talk. But, So so anyway, I'm I I'm I'm sorry for many things. I'm sorry for not being sorry. I'm sorry that we're here. I'm sorry that, like, the other person in the Internet is, like, what you guys gonna do?
Speaker 1:Like, an episode, like, white water is wet. The the earth is round. We we might. I don't know. I I can't say we won't.
Speaker 1:So at this point
Speaker 2:Stay tuned.
Speaker 1:Stay tuned. Exactly. So the the the the tweet is, from Nate Silver. Okay. First of all, what is your relationship with Nate Silver, Adam?
Speaker 2:Oh, I I think I think like many. I don't know. Like, you know, there was a time when 538 was, like,
Speaker 1:true. Everything.
Speaker 2:Like yes. Like, if you reload it enough, then then things would become true, and it would and that that it had previously predicted. And then complicated after that.
Speaker 1:Yeah. I kinda felt like I I think, like, kinda 2016 was my Nate Silver account. You know? And he lightly kinda called the 2016 election, and, you know, people were kind of, you know, figuring out where they stood after that. And then I don't know, something like like a bolt came loose or something in his brain, I feel.
Speaker 1:And just started getting, like, a little bonkers, and then kind of more bonkers and then some other stuff where it's like, alright. This is not this is not what I came here for, I feel. And it's, like, I and it's kind of been watching a bit of a disintegration. So it sounds like I'm not the only one that has that, that feeling.
Speaker 2:But sounds like you're still following the Nate Silver question mark?
Speaker 1:Okay. That felt that is a great question. And I actually do I yeah. I am. I'm still following him.
Speaker 2:There we go. So that's how that this tweet came across the radar.
Speaker 1:Really. I I'm right away with this. So the there's so this is a tweet. The most important inventions of the decade of the 1900 versus the decade of the 2000. You gotta think like, oh, what's gonna go, wrong with this tweet?
Speaker 1:Nothing can go wrong here. Off to a great start. Pretty good evidence for secular stagnation. And then you and then what's amazing is then she's got these 10 inventions from the 1st decade of 20th century. And these 10 inventions can you see my air quotes, Adam?
Speaker 1:I'm not sure if the air quotes are coming through on the audio. You gotta be air quotes there. These 10 inventions from the 1st decade of the of the 21st century, and we're contrasting them. And we are drawing the conclusion that, apparently, innovation has stagnated. And, I mean, I've got so many questions about this.
Speaker 1:Then just to, like, answer one of the questions you might have, this is where to get in our our colleague, Eliza, definitely, called this made this observation as well. This is where it kind of, like, slips into, like, what are we doing? It's, like, what is the source for this? Oh, the source is mostly various co o m's, but I had to do a lot of verifying and vetting. It's like, what, like, googling from the LOMs.
Speaker 1:Some inventions are hard to date precisely. Other suggestions are welcome. So there I don't know. Adam, so you'd had you not seen this until I I tried to drag this dead mouse to you? Had you, avoided this thing?
Speaker 2:No. Have not seen it, And I don't know. It feels feels sort of baby. It feels like the kind of stuff that I see on Twitter these days. Right.
Speaker 1:No. Like, why am I here? Why wait, wait, who do I have to blame other than, than, than myself?
Speaker 2:What do we mean by secular and what do we mean by stagnation? What do you think?
Speaker 1:Yes. I've got the okay. These are really good questions. What, like, what do we mean by secular? What do we mean by and I actually also feel like that is a word.
Speaker 1:It reminds me of the Simpsons episode where they talk about paradigm. Like, isn't paradigm just or the Yeah. You know, I I kind of feel that with I mean, because I mean, secular means, like, non religious. Right? I mean, secular mean that that's the actual but so what when we talk about secular trends, I mean, we're we're talking about trends that are kind of I mean, I use that to kind of talk about things that are kinda separated out from, from kind of like cycle that this is like this is like kind of a macro trend.
Speaker 1:I guess that's what what he means here. That's a a macro trend of the stagnation of of innovation. I mean it's kind of so I mean there are a bunch of questions so yeah what do we mean by bisexual or what do we mean by stagnation. I don't know what that means. What are these actual invention?
Speaker 1:And when we see what is an invention? You know what I mean? Like, theory of relativity is not an invention. Right? Do we call is that an invention?
Speaker 2:I mean Tricky. I I guess not. A discovery? I don't know.
Speaker 1:Yes. Isn't that a discovery? Isn't that like doesn't isn't this the fundamental difference between science and engineering? I mean, the I mean, I just feel like I don't know maybe that's just me, you know, maybe that is but to me, like, air conditioning, like, the air conditioning is is is an invention, I guess. I mean, it is for sure, but theory of relativity, I don't see I don't see how that's an invention, but what I I it doesn't really matter, I guess.
Speaker 1:I also here here's another question I have for you. What is the purpose? Where are we? What is I mean, I know you're asking. What do you mean where are we?
Speaker 1:You brought us here.
Speaker 2:No. You're driving.
Speaker 1:What do
Speaker 3:you mean you're lost?
Speaker 1:You told me confidently you knew exactly where we're going when we left. Like, you can't be lost. I am allowed to be lost. You're not allowed to be lost. No.
Speaker 1:But, like, what are we in terms of of why grade the importance of innovation wherever it may lie? You know what I mean? Yeah. I I just don't think it's that. Like, what what I mean, it's kind of an earnest question of, like, what does that tell us?
Speaker 1:Does that tell us something that we didn't previously know? I don't know that it does. You know, like, does the Nobel Prize tell us something that we don't already know? I mean, do we do we really not know what these things are? I mean, I just feel like I mean, Nobel prize is great, and it's great to honor folks and so on.
Speaker 1:I mean, there's, like, other reasons to have these awards, but I just don't know that it, like, it it tells us very much.
Speaker 2:That's right. Is is it meant to be some some commentary on the lethargy of these kids or whatever the, you know, that younger generations are not innovating in the way that the greatest generation did or something. But I'm not really sure that that's what that's the intention either.
Speaker 1:So I and and someone's putting on the chat, the secular stagnation is actually a technical term in economics. So I I it is long term in the sense. So, thank you Wikipedia. Alright. That's, like alright, Nate Silver.
Speaker 1:I'm, you know, I I I I apologize. I apologize for that one. I apologize for that. And then so there's a question of, like, why do this? Like, what is it biased to do this?
Speaker 1:And then, like, what does it mean for all of this to be stagnating or slowing down? Also, if you like, are there important things that are missing? Which I think the answer to that is, like, yes.
Speaker 2:Gotta be yes. Right. Right? And then there are
Speaker 1:is it is it too early for us to if we are gonna be, like, really evaluative about the the impact of these technologies, is it too early for us to be doing that? Or the technologies that only came out 15 years ago, 20 years ago.
Speaker 2:That's a great that's a great point. And, you know, is it fair to look at a particular window of time? You know, because I I can imagine that innovation, even in its longest term consequences, is not gonna be uniformly distributed. Like, that there are going to be, just by happenstance, decades that are more or less, by whatever measure Nate happens to be using or or or seems objectively true. Totally.
Speaker 1:And and what is that like? What is that what's the meaning of, like, why why a 100 years? And, like, why that? I also feel that, like, the you know, a kind of a whether this is just is true or certainly seems to be true. I mean, I'm always amazed at the the we've talked about this before.
Speaker 1:Famous stressful event, World War 2. The just the amount of innovation that came out when when that kind of desperation. Right? We've talked about this before. We talked about this on our on our kind of our GPT episode that, like, the the the desperation being kind of an important trait in innovation.
Speaker 1:And when you're kinda comparing different times, you may be comparing times of, like, different levels of desperation at some level. And it's like so you may be looking at the wrong thing.
Speaker 2:Yeah. That's right.
Speaker 1:And so you I also feel that, like, there were so in charge maybe let's start with do you wanna start with things that that we think that they might have been missing? I mean, that you have Sure. That's great. There were a couple and by the way, like, you don't need to just listen to us rant here if people wanna, like, hop on the stage and, like, just really, the I I've got a couple big ones that and there were a couple of folks pointing out too, there's some big ones that we're we're missing.
Speaker 2:Yeah. What what do you have on your list?
Speaker 1:Well, I I have to say first among them, and this is something I would like to know more about, is the Haber process for, which is the industrial process that gave us fertilizer. And the the I think it's just
Speaker 2:Is this like nitrogen fixing?
Speaker 1:Yes. Nitrogen fixing. Yeah. And, like, real questions about whether humanity could feed itself in the late 19th century and whether that we would just starve to death because there were too many people chasing too few resources, and the that was, I mean, the the industrialization of fertilizer was really, really important for that. And, I kinda feel like that's gotta be on that.
Speaker 1:I mean, that I think that that's, like, right bull's eye in the middle of that decade. It feels like that's super important, and, I mean, I get this. It's also kind of the the the innovation that I think, Adam, you and I both gravitate to, which is, like, the I I the stuff I really find interesting is the stuff that are the kind of, like, the hidden bits that actually all of modernity depends on. Not like you actually didn't realize that and I mean, of course, I'm sure any chemist is, like, spitting out their drinking, like, this is not a hidden bit, pal. Like, this is sorry.
Speaker 1:This is this is a
Speaker 2:big deal but
Speaker 1:I think that the there are there's a lot of stuff like that where you've got a it's something that you you don't necessarily see, but it has made your life possible. And I I mean, I feel like the the Haber processes be I I don't know. That's when I that that I would be my nominee there.
Speaker 2:You're you're saying, like, maybe bump safety razor off the off the list and grow beers.
Speaker 1:Oh, not safety razor.
Speaker 2:We got it. We we feed humanity.
Speaker 1:That's what I see. Safety safety razor. You know, that okay. Yeah. That's a good also, like, you can say, like, what does definitely not belong in the a safety razor does feel I also gotta say vacuum cleaner.
Speaker 1:Really? I mean, you think vacuum cleaner is up there with the I don't know.
Speaker 2:I mean, who are we asking? We're asking some LLMs.
Speaker 1:We're asking some HoHems. Some LLMs who apparently who, you know, say the LOM can't grow a beard, can't grow facial hair, and it has always looked from afar and wondered, what would he like if,
Speaker 2:and
Speaker 1:it feels it feels I don't know. I'm an LOM, but it feels, like, really important. It feels like the safety razor was a big big breakthrough for you all right up there with the, with the airplane, honestly. Yeah. So I
Speaker 2:mean, so more the more modern one, I thought CRISPR seemed I I think that's, like, early 2000 or, you know, the the aughts. Yes. Seems like it should be on the list.
Speaker 1:And, actually, you bring up another good point. What is the point of putting a date on these things? I mean, because I feel like a lot of these things, it is hard to pinpoint. I mean, there are things, obviously, that you have, like, a breakthrough, a big breakthrough, but, like, the, you know, even CRISPR and, you know, the, the, out in a Telling me that
Speaker 2:the Isaac Isaacson book that I forced you to read, Is that what you're trying to weasel around?
Speaker 1:You didn't for I read it of my own volition. But I, I would I thought, I mean, it's actually that book was actually
Speaker 2:okay.
Speaker 1:I think and, you know, because the topic is so interesting. Yes. The topic is very wild.
Speaker 2:I remember your quote from the back cover.
Speaker 1:This book is actually okay, Rave's Brian Can't answer that.
Speaker 2:Actually, okay. Because the topic is so interesting. Yes.
Speaker 1:Because the topic is interesting. Yeah. The the they re they wanted to use that one. They thought that was a pull quote that could really move copies. So I'm like, you know what?
Speaker 1:I'm like, my book also had an odor. Did yours have an odor? Can we do we talk about this?
Speaker 2:Well, it was electronic. So
Speaker 1:no. I no. I knew it. So this is like okay. Okay.
Speaker 1:Not to get too conspiratorial, but I'm like, is this some sort of, like, ebook thing where it's like now we just we're kinda like going to pot on the printed book and, like, yeah, there's, like, a there's an odor to kinda drive me to, an electronic copy. Alright. So you
Speaker 2:So you're, like, a printed book truther vis a vis the odor of printed books.
Speaker 1:That's right. And I'm going to have a tweet on this and it's so we're gonna have his own podcast talking about how crazy I am. Okay. So that's what's gonna happen. That that that's the way.
Speaker 1:I love it.
Speaker 2:Big ebook is forcing everyone
Speaker 1:into their Big ebook
Speaker 2:is forcing demand.
Speaker 1:That that's exactly right. Okay. Well, of course, it sounds crazy when you say it that way, but I just say, listen, do your own research. I just think there are a lot of questions. I think there's
Speaker 2:Just asking questions here.
Speaker 1:I'm just asking questions. I'm saying that book had an odor. It felt noxious, and I was overwhelmed with the desire to read ebooks after reading it. I don't know. Do your own research.
Speaker 1:Okay. And this is another there actually, there's another one in the in the chat on, Norman Borlaug. I don't know if you did you and, this is another part of the green revolution. So I was kinda going back to to the Haber process for a second. The did you see this?
Speaker 1:Go around, Adam. So there's there's apparently a bio in this guy. And, someone who really we'd actually we should get on the podcast. I and I can't remember where I saw this. It was like, this bio is like the best bio I've ever read.
Speaker 1:So immediately, we're like, alright. I'm gonna go buy my copy for $2. It's like, no. You're not. That's like that's a you're gonna buy a copy for like a $120.
Speaker 1:And it's, but I'm so I'm really fascinated by the ag I mean, ag tech is missing from this list, and I think ag tech is super important.
Speaker 2:That's my
Speaker 1:have you read Dream Reaper by Craig K9? Have you talked about this?
Speaker 2:No. I haven't.
Speaker 1:The so Dream Reaper is this book in the Sloan Technology series, that I think is outstanding. The series is outstanding, but the book is really outstanding about the a startup developing a bi rotor combine. So going to compete with International Harvester and John Deere in ag machinery, really interesting book. And it's all because it's also, like, a history of agricultural technology, and, man, without agtech, like, you and I are in the fields. We all are.
Speaker 1:I mean, that's what like, we it's really I think everyone should get some reference. I'd like to get more reference. I'd like to get I I wish there was more written about it, about agtech because I think it's so important. It it's what has allowed us to go, you know, tweet and argue about tweets. Alright.
Speaker 1:So CRISPR, we feel is but let's so that book on CRISPR, though, sorry to get back to your point, that book on CRISPR, the the Isaacson books on CRISPR talks about, like, how I mean, there then, yes, our folks have won the Nobel Prize for it, but, like, there are a whole bunch of things that that begin to I mean, there's a a bunch of things that happen over time, and it it kind of a bunch of things had to be stitched together. And I feel that this is, like, more true than not.
Speaker 2:Yeah. No. I think that that that's gotta be true of almost every innovation. I mean, I don't know. I guess maybe that was less true, you know, when when Newton was scratching his head thinking about stuff, but I think even then, it probably was not the
Speaker 1:case. Yeah. It feels like it it it I think, you know okay. This is interesting because this does bring up a very important point about, like, discovery in, like, the Newton era or, like, the Euler era. Right?
Speaker 1:Which is, you know, as a mathematician, where it does feel like I mean, Euler is so ridiculously prolific in part because, I mean, obviously, extraordinarily bright, extraordinarily energetic guy, but also, like, coming out at, like, kind of the right time in history in terms of being able to, like, a bunch of open problems in front of them. And I I do feel like when we're, like, kinda comparing ages, I do feel like, yeah, of course, there are gonna be eras when which a a new domain is opened up, and it's just like, yeah, the problems are I mean, easier is the okay. Can we have we I know we talked this before, but, like, Dijkstra's algorithm. That's obvious. Right?
Speaker 2:I'm surprised you didn't lead with Dykester's algorithm. I I I thought that's I thought that was gonna be the first one out
Speaker 1:of the gate. You have a bigger car. Yeah.
Speaker 2:The problems were kind of thick on the ground. Right? It wasn't.
Speaker 1:Yeah. I mean, I think like like nothing against although we I and, you know, I guess we can go back to our our our podcast about the, dragging Dykstra. But I I do feel that, like, I'd like to say that Dijkstra fired first in terms of integrating not just basic, but everybody who learned basic, which includes me. Right. I feel like Dijkstra's algorithm is like it's okay.
Speaker 1:It's great. You I mean, it's great. But feel like, oh my god. That is just extraordinarily subtle. People must have, like, really struggled with this open problem for a period of time.
Speaker 1:And, like, those breakthroughs, I think, are, like, the the ones that are wild and really interesting, but always seem like they have many, many people involved.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Absolutely. I mean, we were talking about LLMs on every episode recently. And and that's and that's, you know, arguably, I think there's a bunch of important work done in the early 2000. Like, I I know, for example, at Facebook, but at other places as well.
Speaker 2:And and dating back in previous decades, it just happened that a bunch of stuff has worked out in surprising ways in the last couple of years.
Speaker 1:Well, and I do think it's wild that Silver is like, innovation is slowing down, says man who asks computer to make his list for him. I mean
Speaker 2:I know. I know. And even if his conclusion is like, geez, the year is 2000 through 2010 were pretty slow. Like, well, did anything happen after that? Anything relevant for this conversation?
Speaker 1:Yeah. And it did feel like he kinda had the the conclusion that I because people were like, wait a minute. Like, how about like how about like gb gb use? How about I mean, I think he does have on his on his 2,000 list. You do have, cloud computing 2002, like, no.
Speaker 1:That's not 2,002. Right? That can't I mean, just I mean, s 3, I think is like 2,006, isn't it? I think 2,002 for cloud computing like someone I and I love that the LOM has tried to leave a footnote there like can you actually give us a whole thing what does footnote 4 say And I do love next to cloud computing. It's like, boy, what can rise level to cloud computing?
Speaker 1:I don't know. USB drive?
Speaker 2:It's like, what? It's like, I mean, and like the thing that we used for arguably 15 years and then haven't used since.
Speaker 1:The in terms of USB drives? Yeah. I mean Okay. Well, look. I mean, now you're putting me in a position where you gotta, like, defend USB drives.
Speaker 1:Like, I think USB I mean, I use USB drives all the time, but I I just don't know about it. I just yeah. Still. I'm gonna use a USB drive tonight. Did you know that?
Speaker 1:Okay.
Speaker 2:To get, like, the thing off of the thing. Sure.
Speaker 1:Yeah. To get the thing off the thing. Like, right now, we're we're this is being right now, as you speak, the you've got a micro USB drive that is actually. Wow. Which I and I I honor its its contribution to this podcast and to civilization.
Speaker 1:I don't feel it belongs on this list.
Speaker 2:I will take that. Let's see. Google Maps.
Speaker 1:Exactly. Google Maps. And so then you've got the when Google Maps is another good example. Right? Because, like, what is the innovation of Google Maps?
Speaker 1:Like, Google Maps is building on all sorts of different things and they had some, like, wildly creative contributions. I don't know what I remember is the wildly creative contribution of Google Maps. May not be the wildly creative contribution of people remember, but don't know about you, Adam, but, like, what I remember is, like, that was the app that was, like, wow. Ajax is a thing. I and Ashley is saying this in the chat as well.
Speaker 1:Like, that way, Google Maps, do you remember? Like, that was wild. I remember where I was when I was first we were we were in the Metaweb office.
Speaker 2:That's right. That's right. And this was building, like, because, MapQuest or whatever was the the state of the art.
Speaker 1:MapQuest was the state of the art, and you were taking these GIS systems, which are kind of like these extent systems, and then combining it with this, like, really creative programming technique and taking this, like, kinda hole in the browser that was XML HTTP request and, you know, turning that into AJAX, asynchronous JavaScript and XML, and, like, that was a and that whole idea was, like I mean, that might be the even bigger contribution of Google Maps. I don't know. I mean, it's a it was a it was a big deal. Yeah. And then you you got the, so and I guess we're trying to, like the the big theme that they're trying to that Silver's trying to make is that things are slowing down.
Speaker 1:Again, I don't even know why okay. So what? Like, let's just say yes. It's slowing down. So, like, do you wanna get off?
Speaker 1:I mean, do you I just don't understand. Like, are you gonna leave? I mean, I I I just don't understand what that means if it's slowing down. I mean, this is kinda reminds me of, you know, even though I would prefer to you you to read SPF's positions, but SPF's position on Shakespeare, which I really was feeling. I forgot about that.
Speaker 1:It's like, what's the like, what why? What does that matter?
Speaker 2:And so and then Because we as humanity are using our precious resources more conservatively. I'm just kidding.
Speaker 1:Well, the I mean, I guess if there was, like, a policy angle to it at the end, that would be kind of interesting, but I don't know that there is. And so here's the okay. Here's the, like, somewhat serious reason why this is why we're maybe why we're here. The I think it is really dangerous. I think we've talked about this before, but I really wanna accentuate it.
Speaker 1:I think it is dangerous to imply that problems, all problems have been solved. That there is no there is no room for innovation and I feel that, you know, in in each of these domains I mean, because the kind of the implication is that the, you know, these domains that were developed in the, you know, the the the air the aircraft being developed in 1903 was that there's no innovation left in aircraft. It's like, no. False. Like, there's no innovation left in these it's like there there is innovation left in in lots and lots and lots of things.
Speaker 1:It's Yeah. It's just it feels it less as you say, you know, the the there's it's not necessarily thick on the ground. It's like Yeah. You're gonna have to work longer. You're gonna have to work with a group of people.
Speaker 1:It's just gonna be it it's gonna be grindier.
Speaker 2:You know, this reminds me of, I think I've talked a bunch about we've talked a bunch about that, acquired episode on TSMC.
Speaker 1:Yeah. It's amazing.
Speaker 2:And the the the crazy stuff that that you need to do for, like, the ultra the extreme UV lithography and, you know, melting molten tin particles with lasers, you know, to emit this this light at a particular wavelength. That is just wild to me. Like the Wild. Yeah. Just standing on the shoulders of giants, on the shoulders of giants, and so forth, and and how we would recreate all of this from nothing.
Speaker 2:It just it feels it's so path dependent. I'm not sure that, you know, if a couple of critical pieces of infrastructure just disappeared off the face of the earth or or knowledge disappeared, like how long it would take us as a society to recover.
Speaker 1:You know, and maybe that is like is that the angle? Is that is like, is is that what's under people's fingernails? Is the idea that, like, no. No. Because it's, like, not a lone inventor, like, I myself can't understand it.
Speaker 1:So, like, I am reminded about how small I am in the universe, in which case, like, get over it. Get over yourself. But I I I totally agree. I don't know. Like, as a kid, do you do you read the Kentucky Yankee in King Arthur's Court?
Speaker 1:For sure. And actually, this is a role reversal. Do you know why? I did not read it. I listened to it.
Speaker 1:I On on a cassette? On a cassette. On a cassette. So this was actually amazing. So there was a, a theater group actually based out of San Francisco and, called the Jabberwocky.
Speaker 1:And they they had a company called the Mind's Eye, and they made these they would record literature, but they would but but it would be acted. It was like old radio timey acting and they were amazing. And so I used to my sister and I used to listen to these over and over and over again. So listen to, like, Hawk Finn and the the
Speaker 2:Odyssey. I got time time out. Was this actually a cassette or was it a record? Just tell me the truth. It's fine.
Speaker 2:We can move on. I just need to know.
Speaker 1:It was why would it not be a cassette? Why it is a cassette? But why would it not be cassette? I mean, I listened to I know.
Speaker 2:Could have been a record. I don't know. Yeah.
Speaker 1:Okay. I wasn't you know what? I listened to 2 no. I listened to, like, the the the Disney 33 RPM Goobers on Okay. That was on record.
Speaker 1:Okay. We am I everyone's on That's fine.
Speaker 2:I've just I just Oh, it's fine.
Speaker 1:Yeah. It it's a no. So I listened to that on record and on vinyl, but I didn't know this was I don't know even if these were available. These were only on cassette. So you had to get Okay.
Speaker 1:It's on cassette. Wait a minute. That wasn't a serious question. I've been, it was on 8 track. You know, it was on cassette.
Speaker 1:And I actually still have a couple of these, because the I felt like they're like, I I've looked so I they're hard to find. You can find them on eBay occasionally. But there are because I want my own kids to listen to them. I mean, it's like timeless literature, and it's amazing. And so I and then it also came in very timely.
Speaker 1:When I was at school, I realized that, like, actually, I don't really need to read The Odyssey because I've listened to it so many times. I didn't read The Odyssey until I was an adult, actually. And, actually, I can still hear the the voice of the actor who played Odysseus, In my head, it was amazing. But the and so I would love to get a hold of these things just because I think that they're so outstanding, and I I hope that they're not all lost. But so the Connecticut Yankee, he's gone to this court was a great book.
Speaker 1:Right? Mark Twain book about a guy that goes back in time, and he uses his knowledge of modernity in midi I mean, it's such a great premise. Like, Mark Twain, man, that guy's good. That guy just had some good ideas.
Speaker 2:That's a hot take. Yeah. That's a hot take.
Speaker 1:World War two stressful. Mark Twain, talented.
Speaker 2:Pretty good.
Speaker 1:Yeah. Pretty good. But and I just remember as a kid thinking, like, what would I bring back? And I do feel like it is I mean, so many of the things we've built have built so much on one another that, like, you know, you take a single microprocessor back in a time machine and it's really you know, you can't eat it. It's just not gonna be it's gonna be a very limited utility.
Speaker 1:And, you know, and and maybe that's kind of what I maybe people have, like, nostalgia for that era. I'm not sure that that era ever really existed honestly, in terms of, like, an era where you but maybe, you know, in Twain's time 19th century, it did feel like it's, you know, it's very steampunky, says 19th century historian Brian Castro. I'm sorry. I'm gonna shut up.
Speaker 2:This is this is just it's like,
Speaker 1:but it is I mean, you're in a period of, like, massive technological change during the the the the you post civil war, the, just the connection with the country and railroads, everything. You got all the telegraph. You got a bunch of stuff going on, and I love that idea of kind of, like, how would you kinda leverage the and it leveraged the knowledge too, kinda back in time. I think it was a great idea. Yeah.
Speaker 1:But it but it feels like it would be hard to do that now. Like, I'm not sure what you take with you. You know?
Speaker 2:Totally. Like, what? Like, I I feel like I would die almost instantly. Like, I would not have my contact lenses, and I would just be done and of totally no use to society. Like, my soft hands on not even helpful for gathering food.
Speaker 1:You know, I you you're selling your hands short. I think your hands are short. For sure.
Speaker 2:There you go. Alright.
Speaker 1:We're gathering footage.
Speaker 2:So the,
Speaker 1:but, sorry. I I would I would digress. In terms of, like, the, but the collaboration so you you mentioned the TSMC acquired episodes. Sorry. I'm gonna get us rerailed here.
Speaker 1:But just in terms of, like, how remarkable it is. And each generation requires so many, like, impossible problems to be solved. I mean, it really is, it's it's outstanding. I mean, just just amazing kinda like I feel when you dig in any of these technology areas, you find all of these way and I I mean, we've said it on here before. It's like, where is the book on the PCB?
Speaker 1:I mean, the PCB is so amazing and, you know, we've kind of, I and I think it is really important that people realize, like, no, there are a lot of open problems and innovation is continuing. I don't know what where the pace of innovation is. I don't know and I don't know how meaningful it is, but there's a lot of hard problems to be solved and a lot of, like, important breakthroughs to be had, I feel. And a lot of those important breakthroughs are on the things that, like, people are kind of, I mean, there's a solace in working on a problem that people aren't paying attention to. It's the only Yeah.
Speaker 1:Absolutely. Only computer startup in I feel we did we we did do that a lot with, I mean, like, a lot of system software. So in terms of, like, what would be on your software list, by the way, of the Yeah.
Speaker 2:I was making a software list.
Speaker 1:And Yeah. It was on software list.
Speaker 2:Mean, I mean, very unsurprising, but, like, you know, c to Rust was is kind of a big fucking deal.
Speaker 1:It was, like, big.
Speaker 2:And, like, not just because, you know, Rust is Wizzy, and we're Rust fanboys and all that stuff. But but but, actually, it introduces, like, some very important different concepts, and has really changed the way that, you know, the the productivity of folks and the way that people build software and the kind of software that we build and so forth. And, you know, rest of it, it's part of a chain, but all all of those innovations have been incredible and really important.
Speaker 1:Really important. And so, you know, I I I often like when it kind of people decry, like, the lack of innovation. I'm like, okay. Go back into a time machine in 1990 or in 2000. And there's a lot that is different.
Speaker 1:I mean, a lot that's different. And just from, like, and different in terms of, like, the way you live your, like, life, you know, the way you talk to your kids or, you know, can you know, contact your kids or the fact that you're, like, in, like, Safeway, the searching the web for, like, a recipe for this, like, rump roast that's on sale. Wondering, like, do I have the ingredients? It's like, that's bonkers.
Speaker 2:That's right. These incredible things have become so banal. Yes.
Speaker 1:Sobanol. And, I mean, you could imagine I mean, like, we're talking about, like, going backward in time, but if you take someone from the past and bring them forward in time, and they'd be like, woah. That's like your communicator? Like, can you have, like, a video chat with Adam? Like, you I could, but it's like, no.
Speaker 1:We're not gonna do that right now. Like, we could but, like, you can do that, and you don't do that all the time. It's, like, no. No. We don't do that all the time because it's No.
Speaker 2:It's really annoying. Yes.
Speaker 1:It's super annoying. It sounds I know, I know person from 1990, that sounds like wild. And it is, like, it is wild, but then you kinda get over it. I I mean, so I I feel that, like, just to your rust, because it's kind of interesting to do the thought experiment of, like, what would be like to go back in time. And I did this not just as a thought experiment this weekend, I have to tell you.
Speaker 1:I was writing a lot of c this weekend for the first time in a minute. Have you written a lot of c recently?
Speaker 2:I've no. I've not written a lot of c, but I did write some c, and I was very proud of myself that that it sort of worked. But it was not a lot of see.
Speaker 1:I was making kind of a delicate change in the linger, and and it was, I mean, I I it it would really felt off putting. It's like, wow. This is cannot believe we used to do it this way all the time. It feels so, it like and there's, like, in so many different regards. It it feels like the I mean, I don't think our linker is clean like it's relatively clean code.
Speaker 1:As c code goes, this is good c code.
Speaker 2:Mhmm.
Speaker 1:It is still there's so much implicit behavior everywhere. And
Speaker 2:Absolutely.
Speaker 1:You know, like, I, you know, you and I both understand memory safety really well, and I, you know, had an initial cut of this that, that seg faulted when you ran the linker, and I mean, as one does, but not because of memory safety, it was because of initialization, and there was this structure is used as like a static initializer and kind of implicitly assumes, like, c doesn't warn me, like, I I had to, like, discover that, like, wait a minute. There's another way to intuit initialize the structure. That doesn't I mean, there's nothing to prevent you. And I think that, Adam, you know, I both remarked on this, like, the ability to fearlessly refactor code in Rust. I mean, that is just that's otherworldly coming from c.
Speaker 2:Absolute. I mean, it's changed the way I think about writing software. Like, the that, you know, that if you don't feel that sense of fearlessness, you're kind of doing something wrong. Like, you haven't you haven't built constructed things appropriately and so forth. And that's very different.
Speaker 2:Like, back back in the day, you know, I would you know, after I committed some change to the Solaris kernel, I would not sleep well. I would wake up early, and I would check that everything was okay. I don't know if you did this as well, but, like, it Yeah. Every time you're like, have I have I thought through everything? Because it felt like operating without a net.
Speaker 1:I yeah. I still do that. I still
Speaker 2:do not. I I I after
Speaker 1:the swap of estimate, the change that we talked about last week, and we had, an issue that we I we had a performance issue that we encountered this past week, and I was like I'm like, I've broken this somehow. This is me. This is Cantrell. It's always not me, but it was actually it was a it was a very old issue. But, and then, you know, the points you made to it in the chat, Adam, that, like, if you were to take Rust and take it back in time to 1990, not foregone not a foregone conclusion at all that it would be successful in part because it would take, like, it would it would take a while.
Speaker 2:Your 16 megabyte machine? Like, what what now?
Speaker 1:How's that gonna work? Right. The that you've got a like, the resource limits are really different. And I think that, you know, one of the amazing things about Rust is it creates these small artifacts, but it takes a lot of horsepower to create those small artifacts. Yeah.
Speaker 1:This is actually one of the things I was wondering about, like, the in semiconductor, in following Moore's Law, how much of Moore's Law or Bright's Law or whatever you wanna call it? How much of that was being accelerated by Moore's Law? In other words, like, how much did we need the faster processing machines to be able to simulate that next gen? And folks in in semiconductor sort of like, no. No.
Speaker 1:Like, you definitely needed that. You could not like, you that's part of why you can't kinda skip generations because we've actually needed the software that we've been able to build, on that to to be able to build the next generation. I mean, it's very iterative in that regard.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Oh, absolutely.
Speaker 1:So the and this one is kinda like rust artifacts are small. Like, I'm sorry. Do you not have the do you know how how to run a the stat system called? For embedded Rust, they're very small. And I think actually, like, the binaries themselves yeah.
Speaker 1:Small is not the first word that comes to mind, especially because this thing I was debugging over the weekend was a binary with, I think, 240,000 sections in it. So, yes. Fine. Not small. Not small.
Speaker 1:Including, including a section Adam that I believe he must have added because it involved the words Detrace. Eat. Eat. Yes.
Speaker 2:Yep. Nope. You you nailed it.
Speaker 1:I'm like, I think I might know who's involved in creating that section. I I assume that that is the that that's the work that you and Ben Acker did, I would assume. That's
Speaker 2:right. That's right. That's the that was putting a probe descriptions from USDT from usually on statically defined tracing, DTrace for Rust in a kind of format that was convenient for us to do from ASM macros. So, yeah, don't get rid of those yeet sections. They're very low bearing.
Speaker 1:You you you'll be happy to know that the yeet section is but one section of the 250,000. It's all actually the the GCC accept sections is basically all that is. Yeah. But alright. So so what are some of your other, because I absolutely agree with you.
Speaker 1:And the the thought was occurring to me too. Like, wow, Rust is really it's such a and this is, like, not something that Nate Silver's gonna put in a tweet. Yep. You know what I mean? It's like this is something that's such a big deal to practitioners, and I feel like in every domain, there are things like this.
Speaker 1:Like, no. This is a really big deal to practitioners. And if you're not a practitioner, you're like, you're not gonna necessarily appreciate it. All you're gonna appreciate is, like, the better artifacts that result from it.
Speaker 2:So this isn't exactly spot on to, the early 2 1000, but it's not it's not far off, which is horizontally scaled systems. And you know the conversation I'm thinking of, which was in 2000, when I was an intern at Sun, we were, like, walking downstairs to go get lunch, and Sun had just shipped. And I think it was an 8 CPU, like, vertically scaled machine. Like, 8 sockets, 8 core, you know, it it was, like, one core per socket, all that stuff.
Speaker 1:Yes. In Wahindra, I believe I I believe we're walking upstairs from lunch. Is that possible? Okay.
Speaker 2:Yeah. I think the the direction mind. Well, there you go. So, I could definitely possible. But I would say the the crux of it was I said, you know, for $100,000, can I get, like, you know, a 100 computers
Speaker 1:Right?
Speaker 2:Instead of this one computer with 8 CPUs in it? And we're like, sure. I don't know. I'm sure they've thought about it. And they have not thought about it, dear listener.
Speaker 1:No. We had not thought about it, and it was, in hindsight, that was the moment that Sun was doomed.
Speaker 2:Yeah. But, like, horizontally horizontally scaled systems, like, really, really big deal, that I think I mean, obviously, people have been writing distributed systems of various descriptions for a very long time. I feel like it it was at about that time that it went from, like, a thing you could do the to the way that you did things.
Speaker 1:Totally. Yeah. And I think that the the idea that and then I think some things that that came I mean, I think Raft is a big deal, honestly, because, you know, on the one hand, it is, Paxos had had a couple of implementations and, you you or there been a couple of implementations to distribute the consensus, but that's, like, a one where it's like, this was done in a way that was much more readily comprehensible, and then you could be adopted by a bunch of different, software was able to actually incorporate this. And it's really important for a bunch there's a bunch of like, people don't have to necessarily deal with distributed consensus problem because they're using software that solves that for them. Mhmm.
Speaker 1:And that was not true even as recently as, like, 15 years ago. You know, zookeeper 15 years ago was the the the were the only have you interviewed a double zookeeper? It just just trying to warn you warn you away from it because it's, Yeah. And, CK is really, really tough to me. And so, you know, like, that that's an important you know, the the movement to to raft is, like, really important, and that's another one of these things that's just, like, not, you know, not gonna make an innate silver list, but is also, like, indisputably important.
Speaker 1:And it allows you to build, and I feel like, again, there's, like, stuff like that for there's so much stuff like that And I feel So yeah.
Speaker 2:I mean, I don't I don't like to use the term sea change because I don't know that I'm using it properly. But this feels like one where go rather than forcing these monolithic systems to become ever more reliably, we realized that we could make more reliable systems out of less reliable components. And that that was a huge deal.
Speaker 1:Yeah. That was a big deal. Yeah. And and because it's just changing the economics of these systems and allowing for the yeah. Totally.
Speaker 1:I think, you know, Ashley pointed out on it's on Twitter, if not in the chat, that, like, hey. How about, like, antibiotics? Wasn't that the first just going back to, like, the things that are might be I mean, there's just nothing health related here at all. Feels like there have been I mean, we do obviously, we talked about CRISPR, and it it feels like there's just a it means so much so many breakthroughs there. And, you know, I was talking recently to a parent of a, of a kid who had childhood leukemia and, like, that was an absolute death sentence and it's now basically not and that's I mean, what an amazing they've looked there've been a I mean, obviously, the mRNA based vaccines have been have been in I mean, there's a few like there've been so many big health care breakthroughs.
Speaker 1:Probably all the challenges in health care and so on, all the economic challenges. Like, there are some some big, big, big breakthroughs out there.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Absolutely.
Speaker 1:I mean, it feels
Speaker 2:like Literally life changing. Absolutely.
Speaker 1:And it feels like there are gonna be some in the early that that first decade of the 2000 as well. It feels like there are, the I I did love the fact that the, block the blockchain in Bitcoin was on the the chat gpt was like, oh, come on. I mean, are you, and then the the Tesla model s also seems, like, it feels it feels like a product, not I don't know. I you know, now I'm just like, now I'm Yeah.
Speaker 2:It's like yeah. Sure. I don't know. Electric vehicles, like, big deal. Like, making the mass market also big deal, but, like, did Tesla invent that?
Speaker 2:Like, no. Battery technology is incredibly important. Like, may maybe that's, you know but that that's a level of innovation along the lines of, lithography changes. Right? Like that
Speaker 1:Right.
Speaker 2:Each one of these, you know, each new path out, each new nano is, like, a big deal in its own right, but it is kind of incremental.
Speaker 1:Well, it did just that incrementalism. Like, how many innovations really can be isolated from their time and context? I've been offering many. It just is, like, thinking That's right. Like, how many of these things are, like, okay.
Speaker 1:Yeah. We can actually take that back into the time machine, and it's like I it feels like you really I mean, even, like, in, you know, we were talking about Wiles' proof of Fermat's theorem as kind of that. I mean, even that, like, really relied on a bunch of math that was, like, relatively new at that time. Yeah. And the, and, yeah, it's one of the chat is, like, you know, that's this is the Arthur c.
Speaker 1:Clarkline, which the that any level of special that especially advanced technology is indiscreeting indistinguishable from magic, which I actually think is is very true and a huge, huge problem. I do feel that, like, it we so I think a part of the problem about the way we get here that, like, okay, there's nothing new is because, like, we are these abstractions are preventing you from appreciating what brought this to you. You know what I mean? Like, there's no one And you look at something as basic as, like, agtech. It's like, you really gotta go seek that out.
Speaker 1:No one's gonna, like, take you aside and be like, by the way, like, here's why your life depends on the Haber process or, you know, here here's why the by road or combine. Is this a isn't a really important innovation or I feel like we and I think it's really important that we, like, stoke that curiosity to, like, take the stuff apart and learn how it's broken in order to be I mean, just like the this is where he has a clip show, isn't it? Going back to Simon Willison, you know, and I loved his, like, running, like, slow bad LLMs to learn how they work. And that's a really it's really important to, like, rip rip through those levels of abstraction so you realize that it's actually not magic.
Speaker 2:Yeah. No. Absolutely. Because it's it's too easy to to just take take for granted. And, you know, I think, I remember in 2015, I think, like, Back to the Future 2 takes place in 2015, which, you know, felt like an an important move me of my childhood.
Speaker 2:So when it was actually 2015 and we didn't have flying cars, everyone felt very disappointed.
Speaker 1:But I'm sure if
Speaker 2:we had flying cars, they would have felt very pedestrian by then.
Speaker 1:Yeah. That's what you get. That's kind of interesting to think about because, like, we do we love to focus on, like, the flying cars and the jet packs and the moon bases. And, like, alright. I feel ripped off in that stuff.
Speaker 1:But, like, we've got, like, the real time video chat with grandma. Like, don't we wanna talk about that one? Like, no. No. No.
Speaker 1:That one. Because that one's pedestrian. You know? It's like, it's boring. It's like, no.
Speaker 1:But that's kind of the point. Right? It's like we're we're fixating on the stuff that we, and yeah. Yeah. You're right.
Speaker 1:If we had flying cars, you'd be like, no. Not flying cars. I wanted jet packs, not flying
Speaker 2:cars. Like, the job I wanted flying cars on Mars, but it's like, well, we only have cars on Mars, and, like, they're unmanned. Like, that's boring. That it's boring. That's amazing.
Speaker 1:It is. Totally. And did you, you know, someone actually had, on on Mastodon had pointed us to, a Andrea Collier video on that. I don't know if you saw.
Speaker 2:Yeah. I did. I I watched, about 2 thirds of it. Terrific video.
Speaker 1:She's amazing, astrophysicist. But she was, taking apart, like, there have been no advances in physics in the last 70 years, which does feel like, okay, that's a pretty generous like, you gotta and I just I don't know if you've gotten to it yet or not, but she was like, it's also just like this the rebuttal on this could just be lasers. I mean, lasers are so incredibly important for absolutely everything that we go do that we do, and that is all, like, physics has brought that too. But she also makes a really important point that I feel like you kinda hit on a bit with the Rust point too, where you have, like, a breakthrough, but it's not really appreciated because it's it's out of its context or it needs other breakthroughs. And it's only, like, 15 years later that, like, okay.
Speaker 1:Now we can really appreciate that and bring it to a much broader I mean, certainly, that that's happened with many, many, many, many things. The the other peril of kind of like assigning it a particular date to these things.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Absolutely.
Speaker 1:I I do love there's a a great bit. The, a, it's one of the chat is is it and a bit by Louis CK talking about how he, like, thinks it's so ridiculous that people complain about, Wi Fi on the plane. He's like, do you feel like thinking like, you're in an aluminum tube moving at, like, 600 miles an hour, you know, 35,000 feet above the earth, and you're complaining and, like, this that you, like, it's
Speaker 2:And you're pissed because they're out of Pringles and the Wi Fi is not working. It's like
Speaker 1:The Wi Fi is not working. Like, seriously? It's like wait. Wait. What what's,
Speaker 2:I'm old enough to remember when Wi Fi was just blew my fucking mind. Like, the Wi
Speaker 1:Fi that I never mind.
Speaker 2:Oh, yeah. I mean, you you my mind in particular. Yeah. No. But No.
Speaker 2:Because, like, you're my number. Yeah. Yeah. I know. I I remember how I I like I was all in on Wi Fi.
Speaker 2:I remember interviewing a son asking if I could, you know, work from the roof for the parking lot. You're like, why would you wanna do that but knock yourself out, buddy?
Speaker 1:I remember that so vividly. We are so goddamn old. This is like he it's like you learned about you learned about Wi Fi from Adam? Like, yes. And he sounded crazy when he described it.
Speaker 1:Like, there are no wires anywhere. It's like, that's like, well
Speaker 2:That's gonna work. Right?
Speaker 1:Yeah. Right. Yeah. Like, that can't no. I do remember, like, god.
Speaker 1:That first thing I had Wi Fi, like, oh my god. I've not plugged in anywhere. This is amazing. And you gotta feel like there's gonna be stuff for sure, like, in 20 years, like, it's I I just feel it we, and actually on that note, you know, you are an early adopter of so much, the vision pro. Where are you on the vision pro?
Speaker 2:Nah. Not pass. Like, it's so expensive, man. And, you know, what am I gonna So I mean, part of it is I'm not interested. 2nd, if I sat at my desk with the vision pro on, like, my wife would just, like, poke me in the back of that my head when I wasn't looking.
Speaker 2:Like, it would it would just invite ridicule at home and at the office.
Speaker 1:At home and abroad. Is Steve actually gonna bar Steve is threatening to barge on stage, but I the is Steve wearing his goggles right now? That's the that that that's the question. Steve's here. Steve, you've barged on stage.
Speaker 1:I'm not
Speaker 3:I'm not I'm not wearing my goggles right now. I have not bought a VisionPRO even though I keep flirting with the idea constantly. My my, my estimations of how successful it's gonna be has been rapidly going up and down over the last couple days since we did the, prediction episode. Yeah. In particular.
Speaker 3:First of all, because the thing that I said back then was that I thought it was, basically the equivalent of MacBook Pro, but it turns out it's actually, like, significantly less powerful. So, therefore, my estimate went down. I was like, oh, looking bad for my, my suggestion. But But there's, like, a lot of subtleties in the way that they built it that I think make it seem very interesting and possibly good. So it kinda, like, my vibes went back up on it.
Speaker 3:So I'm still I think I'm still where I originally was at, but there's been a lot of interesting stuff since it's actually in people's hands now.
Speaker 1:Steve Reversworth, I too have been thinking about your prediction these last couple of days. And I've been I've I I have been I've been bullish. I think because to me, like, your prediction was this is gonna be successful enough if they do another one, and I feel it feels that way. It feels like Yeah. And it feels like the the tech is is just looks like it's mind bending.
Speaker 1:I just I I just don't know. I I I it just feels like it's a segue Still too
Speaker 3:expensive for too many people. Yeah. It's, like, it's, like, still too expensive for mass adoption, and it's still, like, too big and weird. But, like, if you can get that in a sunglasses form factor someday or, like, something that's, like, maybe large glasses form factor, like, I think that significantly helps. If you can get the the screens down lower, Anyway When
Speaker 1:you say large glasses, I'm envisioning, like, not like clown glasses, though. Not those kind
Speaker 3:of Like clown glasses. Everyone don't think that's super normal. Right? It'll be future fashion. We'll just.
Speaker 3:But, yes, I don't think you can ever truly get it to that site. Blah blah blah. I just think that, like, the focus on AR over VR is, like, a smart thing, and we'll, like, see how it ends up. That's all.
Speaker 1:And so one thing I saw going online just kind of goes good. This is also this, like, you know, the the pace of innovation, but, like, how innovations happen and are they ahead of their time? Is is this like the Apple Newton? And and Steve, did you have a Newton?
Speaker 3:I never I never owned a Newton. No. I did a little bit of, like, Palm Pilot development in college because there was a class about that, but I've never, like, I never really significantly used those class of, machines feel strong, but, like, they are computers. So yeah. Sure.
Speaker 3:I never really had that stuff.
Speaker 1:But the but the Newton also feels like there's something that there was a lot that ended up being important in the Newton that we kinda laughed out at the time or people that did dismiss at the time. And, Adam, did you have
Speaker 2:a Newton? No. No. No. No.
Speaker 2:No. No. I I had a Palm Pilot as well, but you're you're right. Like, I was I'm part of this. Like, I was a kid.
Speaker 2:Right? Like, I didn't have whatever 100 of dollars to blow on a Newton. But I guess that was part of the problem. Like, nobody had those 100 of dollars to blow on that particular device. But I was very excited for it.
Speaker 1:Right. I was when I came out to Silicon Valley, it was right when they had the vigil for it. They they they they had, like, a single light vigil for that feels like in, like, 90 maybe 93 or 94. It's maybe slightly before I can. Ugh.
Speaker 1:But can I say, like, in conclusion? Well, aside from, like, Nate Silver being, perhaps right that secular stagnation is a term, I don't think that the the the the pace of of innovation has not been stagnant at all. I think that there's been a a lot and I you know what I also think? Adam, I I am gonna make this this other larger point. I think that we you know what?
Speaker 1:I think that we've got a cultural malaise with respect to grievance. I think we focus and maybe I don't too, but being told by this. But you know what I mean? Like, I think that we don't focus enough on gratitude. We focus too much on grievance.
Speaker 1:And people are like, just to your point about what but damn it. I didn't get the flying cars. Like, forget, you know, I'm gonna ignore all this other stuff that I got. It's like, you know, you got like, there's a lot going on that you got, and we could focus on this. We there's a lot to be grateful for.
Speaker 2:I think that's right. But I also think you you kinda sound crazy when you're like I mean, one of the things I I feel like I talk people's ear off is, like, the fact that people have 10 gigabit Ethernet in the walls of their own home is mind blowing to me.
Speaker 1:It this is such a huge like, the way of us at we're we're gonna be in the same, like, long term care facility. Right, Adam? Is that do we have that in
Speaker 2:our our our Sure. Sure. Sure. Sure. Sure.
Speaker 1:I just gotta be on the porch with you when we are when we I mean, we just we sound like such fossils now. I can't even imagine what it's gonna be so great in 40 years. I you know, we're gonna I just I just wanna be wheeled out on the porch. I mean,
Speaker 2:just like the decollete. Okay. Okay. Okay. I think I need the answer based on what you just said.
Speaker 2:But this, like, this 10 gigabit Ethernet, like, on normal copper wires that like you found in your basement, not blow your mind. And like, it's a gigabit Ethernet into your house in, like, a piece of glass that, like, some dude strings down the manhole cover. I don't know if that they actually do it, but probably something like that.
Speaker 1:Yes. In fact, it is your we have got fiber that is, like, literally strung up to the house. And when they strung it up, I'm like, do are we gonna reinforce that anymore to that? It's like this little, like, little thread that hangs kinda prominently from the house, and it feels, like, extremely fragile to me. And so whenever, like, we have weather the way we did this weekend, I just go out and stare at that little thread to get whipped around, being like, I'm gonna have a full mutiny on my hands.
Speaker 1:Just dear god, if you take the Internet, take the power with it, or I'm gonna have it's gonna be it's
Speaker 2:gonna be mutiny over here.
Speaker 1:Yeah. I well, I'm sorry. I got told over this. I I'm and
Speaker 2:Are you sorry?
Speaker 1:I am I'm getting sorrier, actually. You know, as we've as we kinda got into this, I actually I think I am feeling something that, like, might approach remorse. So, yeah, I think I maybe. Maybe I'm gonna work on that work on that.
Speaker 2:Good.
Speaker 1:But I I think these lists don't really, are the the the stuff that's interesting is all the stuff that's much deeper. And Yeah. We gotta gotta dig to get that stuff. Also, people are asking for an for an oxide book club in the, in the chat. We on that note, what what are you reading right now, Adam?
Speaker 1:Are you reading?
Speaker 2:I'm I'm I've kind of started a couple of books on crypto, which means that I only read them sporadically. One is number go up by, I think
Speaker 1:his name
Speaker 2:is Zeke Pho, which is, like, as some of our our colleague noted the most fake sounding real name that anyone's ever had. Oh, and I'm and I just started another book, on the project. Yeah. And I've started another book on this. I can't remember the name of it.
Speaker 2:I gotta look go look it up, but it's on a startup that was doing facial recognition software in, like, the most terrifying big brother ish way possible. But, I'll keep you posted on that one.
Speaker 1:And keep us on that one. I'm I'm, finishing up this this, history of Sun, I think. And and I actually found out one other history of sun. So I've I think I will have read all all histories of sun. I'm gonna I'm done with my my my sun binge, And then I've got a book on Mackenzie that I'm excited to read.
Speaker 1:But we we we need to, like so we should come up with, like, a book that is, you know, good that we can offer. Yeah. Yeah. I love it.
Speaker 2:Like, we pick pick a book, kinda shoot for March or April or something, give everyone a heads up, and do your homework or don't. But
Speaker 1:And and it will be the pressure will be on because I, like, really can't be a book that was, like, last published in 1982 and was only self published because, if I we've we've learned that we can actually
Speaker 2:drive the product from that stuff. I was gonna go buy all of them up on eBay. Oh. Then we were And you're like Oprah's book club, but for us.
Speaker 1:Oprah's book, but but a racket. That's right. From from the people that discovered Wi Fi from one another. Oh, hey. This has been fun.
Speaker 1:I I we got a bunch of good shows in the pipe. So we're not only just being trolled by the Internet. We've got a bunch of good stuff coming. And, stay tuned. Thanks, everybody.
Speaker 1:And sorry, Adam.
Creators and Guests
