Remix.run Logo
gkoberger a day ago

I was a bit glib, I agree everything built on top of each other. But there were bigger gaps back then than there are now.

dcminter a day ago | parent | next [-]

The biggest gap was information - though I think you have to go back a bit further really. Until the late 90s if you wanted to know about a topic you generally depended upon printed material or direct transfer of knowledge.

I'm rather envious of kids today who have access to Google, Wikipedia, YouTube, and (with caveats) ChatGPT when they're truly interested in a topic. They can dive a lot deeper than I had the opportunity to without bringing in adult assistance.

godelski a day ago | parent | next [-]

Sure, but look at the average person. The average person has all the world's knowledge at their fingertips. The access is there. But do people use it? Or do they use it in that way? How many people just scan a wiki article looking to mic drop on someone else instead of trying to understand what they meant or what the material is actually about? Has something similar to that occurred in this thread?

"Can" is a critical word in your comment.

dcminter a day ago | parent [-]

Sure, but most people just want to go to the pub and watch TV. It's still exciting that for the ones who want to do something the horizon has expanded.

godelski a day ago | parent [-]

Okay? But what's that have to do with what you previously said? So you're agreeing with me now? Great?

dcminter a day ago | parent [-]

I'm not sure, were you contradicting me in the first place? I just thought your point was a bit cynical and I'm giving you my more positive spin on it.

godelski a day ago | parent [-]

I'm more agreeing with gkoberger and davidw. I actually do really like that we have the ability to dig deeper and that this depth is far more accessible than ever before. I agree, this is a huge success and we should be proud of this.

But after acknowledging this you just said that most people want to be lazy. Which is something I was actually agreeing with. Though, I guess I should add that I don't think people are doing that so much because they are lazy by nature but rather that they are overwhelmed. There's definitely a faster pace these days and less time given to have fun and be creative. One might say that it's work and work isn't meant to be fun, but this is mental work and critically, it is creative work. In those domains, "fun" is crucial to progress. It is more a description of exploration and problem solving. If we're all just "wanting to go to the pub and watch TV" (nothing wrong with that) then we'll just implement the quickest dirtiest solution to get things done. I think this can work in the short run but is ineffective in the long run. A little shortcut here and there isn't a big deal, but if you do that every day, every week, every year, those things add up. They are no longer little shortcuts, but a labyrinth. Instead of creating shortcuts, people are actually just navigating this labyrinth they made. It's the difference between being lazy by sitting on the couch all day and being lazy by "work smarter, not harder."

My main concern is with the environment we've created these days. It's the "free time" that davidw mentions. As several people have mentioned, things shifted towards money. My honest belief is that by focusing too much on money we've actually given up on a lot of potential profits. Take Apple. Instead of thinking different and trying new things, they've really mostly concentrated on making things smaller and thinner. That's good and all, but honestly, I'd more than happily have a thicker laptop to give my screen and keyboard more clearance. It's just so fucking difficult to avoid those smudge marks on my screen. We take less risks because we're profit focused. The risks just seem far riskier than they are. We've created walled gardens, which undermine what made the computer and smartphone so successful in the first place! (The ability to program them!) We hyper fixate on spreadsheets. We dismiss our powerusers because they are small in quantity, ignoring the role that they play in the ecosystem. In every ecosystem it is a small portion that does the most. Everything is just so myopic.

I'd agree that all these problems existed to some extent. But what the difference now is scale. I think what changed is the population of the developers. In "the old days" there was a good balance between the coding monkeys and business monkeys, where they pushed back against one another. The business people couldn't do it without the coders and the coders could do it without the business people, but were more effective with them. But I think these days the business monkeys just took over and dominated. The paradigm shifted from wanting to build good products and being happy to get rich while doing so to focusing on the getting rich part. We lost the balance. I think people are still creative, but I think we do not give them room to breathe, I think we do not give them enough room to take their chances. In some ways things are far easier than they've ever been, but in many ways they're also far harder. So are we measuring success by the fact that we have multiple trillion dollar companies, something never seen in 2010, or are we measuring success by the number of products and technologies that have changed peoples' lives. We made Android, iPhone, Maps, YouTube, Twitch, WiFi, Bluetooth, and so much more in just such a short time. But in (more than) that same timeframe, what innovations have we made? There's been some good leaps, don't get me wrong, but even AI is only a small portion of that. During most of that time we saw more vaporware than actual products. For the love of god, there's bitcoin billionaires. Love or hate crypto, it hasn't changed the world in a huge way.

/rant

JustExAWS a day ago | parent [-]

All of those were enabled by decreasing cost and miniaturization of hardware, high speed ubiquitous Internet and later the mobile phone.

But since then the Apple Watch is an innovation both technologically and from a business standpoint, In 2010, I wouldn’t have imagined you could have a processor faster than the original iPhone, with Wifi, Bluetooth, GPS, cellular, satellite communication, 32 GB of storage in something that size with that battery life.

While I think the newly announced Meta glasses are ugly and don’t provide enough value for the money, it was risky and not just another social media platform to provide ads.

Gen AI is some real sci fi shit that I wouldn’t have thoight it would be as far as it is in 2020.

Self driving cars are a real thing on the road right now. Even Uber itself is innovative and has made travel to different cities much better than dealing with taxi services. As much as I dislike Musk as a person, you can’t deny SpaceX and Starlink are game changers. All of the major tech companies are spending a lot of money on better custom processors and TSMC is doing some wild stuff on the manufacturing side.

The medical industry is also doing some life changing things.

godelski 15 hours ago | parent [-]

I disagree with the why, but sure, let's go with that since it's not really important.

Why could we make those great leaps then and not now? What changed?

JustExAWS 7 hours ago | parent [-]

How could you disagree with cheaper, smaller, faster, more battery efficient hardware led to WiFi, Bluetooth, modern smart phones etc?

But why nothing as ground breaking - physics.

At a certain point you come up with speed of light limitations and other sub atomic interferences that are way out of pay grade when it comes to producing smaller processors.

The industry keeps coming up with new techniques as far as wireless communications. But eventually again you come against physics, certain spectrum is worse for communications and Shannon-Hartley theorem.

With cameras, you can only do so much in a phone form factor. You can also only do so much with current battery technology, heat dissipation vs power etc.

And a lot of the technology is “good enough”. There is only so much video and audio fidelity that you need to reach the limits of human perception.

What exactly break through technology are you looking for?

nonameiguess a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I remember being a kid in the 80s and fascinated by the SDI "Star Wars" project for missile defense. I wanted to learn everything I possibly could about how lasers and particle beams worked, how they were built, how much power they could project, how far, what targeting capabilities were realistic, where you might actually have to place ground stations to fully cover the sky, some raw basics of how spherical geometry and orbital mechanics worked. Most weekends, and definitely every summer for several years, I rode my bike down to the LA County Public Library and checked out the maximum number of books they allowed you to check out, and I did just this. I learned everything I possibly could. I barely remember any of it cause I was like 8 years old, but still, enormous amounts of information have been available to anyone, at least in the US, for a long time. I don't think "printed material" should be a barrier. It takes longer to get to the library than it does to open your laptop or unlock your phone, but the flip side of that is getting outside and riding your bike around incidental to gathering information has quite a few ancillary health benefits you'll never realize if you're tied to a computer all the time.

dcminter a day ago | parent [-]

Ok, but the equivalent for me was in the very early 1980s and I lived in an English village outside a small market town. Their library certainly didn't have any current in-depth book on the computing topics I was interested in. I recall coming across the term "cybernetics" in some tome from the 1950s that was about all they had and being completely unable to connect it to the microcomputers that I was fascinated by.

Probably it would have been possible to get something via inter-library loan, but I would have been 9 or 10, didn't know this was possible and didn't think to ask. The handful of topical books I obtained from parents and schoolfriends was a far cry from just scrolling on your phone to the information you want.

It's not better in every way. But it is better in some ways.

JustExAWS a day ago | parent [-]

Even my small town in south GA had the latest magazines or you could go the bookstore. Like you said the inter library loan was a thing if you knew about it.

scarface_74 a day ago | parent | prev [-]

I was on Usenet in the various comp.* groups in the mid 90s. Dejanews could be used to search news groups then.

dcminter a day ago | parent [-]

Sure, but the volume of information was tiny compared to what was available in printed form - whereas it's the reverse now.

scarface_74 a day ago | parent [-]

If I wanted to know everything about my first computer - an Apple //e - i needed two books. I needed Apple’s official Applesoft Basic manual and another book I checked out from the library about programming in 65C02 assembly on the Apple //e.

JustExAWS a day ago | parent | prev [-]

What were those “gaps”? There were decent compilers and IDEs at least in the mid 90s.

MySQL was available for free in 2000 and anyone could download any number of language runtimes for free like Perl and Java. If your corporate overlords weren’t cheap (or you were in college) an MSDN subscription was amazing.

gkoberger a day ago | parent | next [-]

Sure, things existed. mySQL is a great database, but so is Mongo and so is Clickhouse and so is Firebase, etc. Those alternatives all filled a gap MySQL couldn't, and now the bar for creating a new type of database is significantly higher because there's fewer gaps (schema-less, good for logs, good for fulltext search, realtime, etc).

JavaScript has been around for decades. But jQuery made it so much easier, and then React built on top of that even more. And jQuery wasn't the first DOM library, nor was React the first framework – but both were where it seemingly clicked between ideas, usability and whatever else made them successful.

(I will agree that Microsoft had a run of things where anyone who bought in to their ecosystem had a lot of things that worked well together.)

raw_anon_1111 a day ago | parent [-]

Exactly, the web as an app platform didn’t really take off until 2008. If you were a pure Microsoft shop from top to bottom, all you needed was an MSDN subscription provided by your employer.

pixl97 a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Those IDEs sucked compared to what you can download in 5 minutes for free today. The number of libraries available (and where you could find them) was miniscule, and most had very bad documentation for beginners.

godelski a day ago | parent | next [-]

People here talking like we've made no progress in the last few decades... which we're that true then that'd also contradict their point and only agree with you... I'm really confused looking at all these replies

JustExAWS a day ago | parent [-]

The “free IDEs” even today aren’t as good as the paid products by Microsoft and JetBrains.

Especially today while the IDEs are free, people are paying for LLM coding assistants.

godelski a day ago | parent [-]

Tbh, I'm not sure I agree. I program in vim and the terminal. I get way more benefit out of that than VSCode. Regardless, things have improved dramatically. Hell, Linux is way more user friendly than it was even a decade ago.

scarface_74 a day ago | parent [-]

With Vim and the terminal can I set conditional breakpoints, watches, and back in the day when I did bit twiddling in C, debug stack corruption and look at the assembly that the compiler was creating first each line? With JetBrsins ReSharper using Visual Studio, there are hundreds of guaranteed safe project wide refactoring you can do [1] and a lot of various boiler plate code it can autogenerate.

Not to mention the dark days of Window GUI development. How exactly is Vim better than a modern IDE?

[1] Yes I know all bets are off when you are using reflection.

scarface_74 a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Did you ever use the Turbo series IDEs or whatever that IBM Java based IDE was? Visual Studio was quite good in 1999.