How could the technology boom have been more useful if it wasn't driven by military or market forces?

Question

How could the technology boom of the past fifty years have been more useful to humankind if it wasn't driven by military or market forces?

This question was asked at the Dropping Knowledge event on 9th September by Dan Hill, 59, Leechburg, Pennsylvania, USA.

To find out more about Dropping Knowledge check out our blog:

Dropping Knowledge in the UK: http://uk.blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-qT1KKPQoRKdVT4lowpJCljbFokkuIzI8?p=1048

Dropping Knowledge in the US: http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-d8pH0dcoRKeB12yOcnUQp.9VCFos?p=12745

To discuss this subject in more detail follow this link to the official Dropping Knowledge website: http://www.droppingknowledge.org/bin/posts/focus/10403.page

Answer 1

First, understand that there would be little or no progress, EVER, if there were no need for military or free market. It is through adversity and necessity that invention is needed to one up one's opponent so that they may win the war or get that needed edge in the market place, so folks can feed their families.

So here we are. No need for military because we are at total peace with one another and God provides all the manna needed to sustain us; therefor, there should be no need for a market either. So... here we are. Oh...technology boom. What technology. There is no technology. The Internet will not exist. I am not sure that even the wheel would have been invented. In fact, I don't think we would even have language skills; so, you probably could not have been able to ask this question. Other animals would have dominated over us and we would have all died. Then maybe, in stead of YOU asking this question, it would have come, maybe another thousand years later, as a neanderthal asked it; because, they may have survived if the humans were not around.

Answer 2

I really don't see how that could happen. You'll have to suggest some alternative driving force; you can't simply say 'Make it different' without providing any background. (Or is it that you have been asked to come up with ideas and are expecting other people to do your work for you...?)

What do we know of that is as exciting as war, or as compelling as the desire to provide for oneself and one's family...?

Conquest of the unknown? We have run out of physical areas to explore.

Conquest of selfishness? Most people are not interested in self-discipline any longer.

Space exploration is not within the reach of individuals; even the rich aboard SpaceShipOne and -Two are tourists. The same goes for the oceans.

The idea of having a phoney alien attack that will unify mankind has been beaten to death, and nothing based on a lie would provide lasting benefits. The reaction would destroy all the temporary gains when the deceit was discovered.

No, I do not think that the tech boom would have been better if it were not driven by military and market forces; your fundamental assumption is quite mistaken. You certainly have not shown that there is any alternative.

Answer 3

Being driven by what makes money and the military does absolutely nothing for the people. Its money and research that should have been used for disease or even developing health care. Technology isn't always the most important and so many fail to see that the military having better weapons or more soldiers is not reassuring but rather frightening! The bigger the armies of the world get, the more war is eminent. On the other side, by being market driven, you get products that are not quite as good as the product should be. They have to sell you a piece of junk first, then you upgrade as the technology "improves." So in this instance, the technology isn't even worth the money of the people as it will be changing over time.

Answer 4

No and if you need an example check Chinese history out. They practically invented everything but there was no use for them. Things get made for of course the mother of invention, necessity. Airplanes; we still be trying to get airliners had it not been picked up my the military. It wouldn't have been here even medical advances were pretty much the boom of world war II. If there were no market force there would be no drive to use them.

We would fall into a period of stagnation. Once again I ask you to read up on Chinese invention. They were just way ahead of most people in a lot of things but because of market differences they never applied their tech to more useful things. We live in a world full of luxury that were made because of market forces and crude necessity. You probably would still have slaves if it wasn't for market force. It's just cheaper to let machines do things. So if you are asking were or not we could apply into some eutopic dream of no war and no competition then I think that it is sadly not possible.

Market forces probably invented the wheel. Either that or on smart guy thought hey look if this rock was rounder it roll down faster and kill a lot more people.

Then again, I am all ready for getting our inventions from colonizing space. Thought it seems to be that without market forces and war are drive factors are still pretty much at ground zero. Although space tourism has picked up space a little more. So hold on to your jet pack because maybe market forces can get us up and off this planet to see others.

Answer 5

If the focus was shifted from mere profit making or military dominance, it would have been possible to create technological solutions that address the problems confronting the teeming Millions. Perhaps, poverty would have been abolished from the Earth. A brilliant example of this can be found in India. With Mobile phones coming within the purchasing power of the lower strata of society,they are now able to access distant markets and secure at least fair prices for their produce in the villages. It is another matter that the greedy eyes of the Urban marketeers are set on these new earnings and products of lower priority are sought to be pushed into the hands of the simple folks through Ad gimmicks that not only persuade but downright blackmail the potential customers.
Ethics have been given the Go-by in developing new technologies. The new Technologists should know that there is more money to be made by making the poor rich than by making the few rich richer. Solve their problems and the poor will become your ardent customers.And their number is phenomenal. Little drops of water make the mighty ocean and the Heaven Above comes from little acts of care and concern for the the deprived.
In fact, the rich themselves can profit immensely from such a change, if they take the lead in promoting this shift in Technology priorities.There are a few rich individuals who adopt various methods of sharing their wealth with the poor or the suffering. But much of the money goes waste by the creation of expensive intermediation set ups. What is needed is a total change in the mind set, leading to the establishment of the large Universal
family envisioned by the Indian philosophers of the past.{VASUDHAIVA KUTUMBAKAM}. It means that the whole world is but one family.Take that teaching to your heart and the problems become easier to solve. You will not want to dominate your own kith and kin or cheat them.And the creative energy that is released as a result is enormous enough to bring about sweeping changes.

Answer 6

Yes but then again giving the inventors different drivers would have altered their focus to the point of which we probably wouldn't have seen much developed for such advanced things as wireless cellphones and other mobile technologies that offer us users instantaneous electronic communication from just about anywhere. What I do think that would change is that inventors would focus on changing everybody's lives so we all live more cleanly and or more peacefully together if there wasn't any big money payoff possibly awaiting them and threrfore we'd all probably see less TV infomercials too.

Answer 7

The development of "new" technological advancements is always a "risk/reward" proposition.

Why would anyone risk losing everything to develop a technology, knowing that there is a zero percent chance of even recovering his/her own costs.

The underlying principle of "market forces" is that people will pay for an item that they think is useful, resulting in a benefit for the user and a benefit for the provider. The idea of short-circuiting this process is merely another attempt at sneaking communist theory into the public forum.

we all know how technologically innovative the old Soviet Union was--

Answer 8

Some of the best technology came from the 'Space Race'. If we perceive some nation is doing it better - especially technology - it is easy to get Federal money to fund research and development.

Various fooundations have money for technology -check out the Howard Hughes Foundation

Grants to Universities - especiallyy large grants from Microsoft, Warren Buffet, etc make R and D very feasible -- knowledge for knowledge sake.

Answer 9

Necessity is the
Mother of invention,
and throughout history
the most important
advances have been
made in times of war
or conflicts, with the
market forces rallying
right behind.
Have you ever tried to
get a government research
grant? That is an impossibility
unless you can provide something
in return, so we go back to
point 1 - technology will advance
due to necessity under dire
circumstances and the market
rallying right behind.

Answer 10

Without military funding, or a profit motive, there would not have been much of a technological boom. Many people conceive great ideas for new technology, but lack the funds to develop the idea toward a practical conclusion. Government funding ---such as the military or NASA --- is responsible for the majority of our technology and its civilian spin-off.