I remember, first color tube TVs, used high voltage triode for anode stabilization circuit. It worked so hard, that it was radiating X rays, so it was included in shielded cage in TV's. Cage had vent holes, and X-Ray strength was enough to leave negative image of that cage on photo paper, if you bring it close enough.
@Heater & potatohead: So what absolutely essential thing are we running out of?
Around 1969 I was told by very earnest and informed individuals that by 1985 there would be no more petroleum. This really worried me! My father almost laughed at my concerns. Fast forward to 2015 and there is still plenty of petroleum...in addition to many viable electric vehicles (that are here well before we need them).
Having been fooled once, I'm practically immune to doom and gloom predictions.
On another note, who in the world would want to go back to 90V primary cells??? What a waste of resources! What a cumbersome, expensive way to listen to music! Who even uses AM or FM radio for their music? I'm certainly not going to haul a tube radio and carbon-zinc batteries up a 12,000' mountain. I'm very happy with my tiny MP3 that has on it every song on it I ever liked, and is powered by the same NiMH AAA that it started with years ago. I can even charge the cell with a $5 plastic solar panel.
There was an attempt to make AM radio digital (Digital Radio Mundiale), so stereo music, info picture and other goodies should be available, but it flopped.
For the audiophile talk. Koss Porta Pro was going strong 30 years ago, and so does it right now, no matter how many beats were beaten by various doctors
On another note, who in the world would want to go back to 90V primary cells??? What a waste of resources! What a cumbersome, expensive way to listen to music!
Nah, you can have the past!
And not just one battery. Back in the early days of radio, "modern" receivers were large wooden boxes with up to 3 different batteries (A, B, and C): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_(vacuum_tube)
It was not uncommon for one of those batteries to leak acid and ruin the carpet under a console radio. Thus, the radio stayed in place. Earth and long wire antenna connections also required. No mobile radios back then for a variety of reasons!
From http://antiqueradio.org/bsupply.htm: "Lead acid cells could leak acid, which might drip out of the radio cabinet onto your lovely Persian rug. Worst of all, if you accidentally reversed the A and B battery connectors, you could fry your radio's precious tubes."
The Schwarzenegger Running Man movie came out in 1987 and I remember laughing uproariously at the idea of its teeny "digital video" cartridges, a key plot point being the ease of hiding them. At the time the state of the art for video storage was a videotape cartridge the size of a paperback book. I was a bit taken aback when I realized that USB thumb drives and SD cards had become those cartridges.
The nice devices of today are great. I have no love for big batteries, and frankly only used one as a curio. AC powered tube sets are a different matter. They have a great sound.
As for music, a lot of people, myself included, agree. Radio is a great technology for more than music. And it is still very difficult to beat for talk, news, drama, sports.
Digital Mondale is crappy. However, C-Quam stereo was and in a few places still is pretty great for the same kinds of programs. I have one in my truck. People who hear a sportscaster nearly always comment.
For bad times, radio is extremely robust. We do not have a comparable tech replacement.
For the entertainment use case, we have a lot of superior replacements. Podcast, mp3, etc... I am a huge user of audio material, and we live in very good times.
Once, I bought an AM stereo kit and used it with my truck radio as well as older tube units. That mass in the cabinet still does what it has always done.
Re: artifacts.
Yes. OTA broadcasters can and often do send us an excellent, near artifact free signal. We get to see the potential at least. Everybody else made the choice tradeoff at the expense of quality, and it is all ugly to me. Cable can be the worst. I see blocks all the time.
I just quit watching.
For the answer as to why, consider this:
Two choices. One crappy quality but compelling, the other pristine and boring. Which do you use?
That is why I quit watching.
And I am better for it too, but the artifacts still suck.
And not just one battery. Back in the early days of radio, "modern" receivers were large wooden boxes with up to 3 different batteries (A, B, and C): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_(vacuum_tube)
It was not uncommon for one of those batteries to leak acid and ruin the carpet under a console radio. Thus, the radio stayed in place. Earth and long wire antenna connections also required. No mobile radios back then for a variety of reasons!
From http://antiqueradio.org/bsupply.htm: "Lead acid cells could leak acid, which might drip out of the radio cabinet onto your lovely Persian rug. Worst of all, if you accidentally reversed the A and B battery connectors, you could fry your radio's precious tubes."
I have a Crosley 51 Radio packed in a box somewhere in my attic. When I was in high school, back in the '70s, I worked in a TV repair shop. One day I came into work and the boss was cleaning out the back room. He had a bunch of vintage radio's and tubes laying in a pile, along with a lot pf pure junk. He let me go through the pile and take what I wanted.
I have a Crosley 51 Radio packed in a box somewhere in my attic. When I was in high school, back in the '70s, I worked in a TV repair shop. One day I came into work and the boss was cleaning out the back room. He had a bunch of vintage radio's and tubes laying in a pile, along with a lot pf pure junk. He let me go through the pile and take what I wanted.
Good score! If he had a Philco Predicta TV there, I would have grabbed one. I have two now.
We must be nearly the same age, I graduated high school in 1978.
Computer class in high school. We were impressed by brand new Yamaha MSX capabilities. A carate game ("Karateka" , if I'm not mistaken) was very impressive. So we thought - "If such cool game fits into 16kb, how much memory will be needed to fit the complete MOVIE?". We discussed a lot, and agreed that "1MB ought to be enough for anything" including movies (We dodn't knew about Gates famous speech then). Just for clarification, we approached our teacher and asked her about that. She thinked for couple of minutes and than said that "I believe, 40-60mb might be enough for full movie?" We shaked our heads, said thanks and went away But later, we'were talking "Our teacher must be gone nuts, who ever heard about 40-60mb storage?"
I guess I'm a senior in some circles since I cross the 55 limit next month. Sometimes, I think it is hard to see the revolution as you have lived through it but honestly looking back, it is revolutionary.
Yesterday, my daughter sucked up some water with my vintage 1983 Sears mini canister vacuum and ruined the bag (the vacuum seems to have survived). Being the last bag we had. this morning, I sat down at my computer and ordered 8 new bags that will be on my doorstep Tuesday. Total shopping time - 5 minutes while I enjoyed my coffee.
If this was 1985 and I needed to purchase bags, I would have to drive 30-45 minutes through suburban Chicago traffic to the mall go into the Sears store, buy the bags and then drive home again. Total shopping time about 2 hours.
Time saved about 1:55. The value of an effortless shopping experience? Dare I say, priceless? Having almost 2 hours in my day to pursue some other endeavor?
Is that Revolutionary? Did I see this coming back in 1983 when I bought the vacuum? Are all the things that went into making that possible just the beginning? I think so.
Take it a step further, while riding with a friend's car, I relate this story and am reminded that I need vacuum bags. I have my tablet with me but alas it doesn't have any internet access except WiFi. Not to worry, my friend has a connected car that creates a WiFi hotspot. I go to Amazon, find the bags, order them and they will still be on my doorstep on Tuesday...all this done while motoring along the highway. Did we see any of that realistically coming in 1985?
While looking at the vacuum, I noticed the little ring that fits on the hose to cover a hole controlling suction was missing - what to do, the vacuum is 30 years old. Fast forward a couple months when I have my 3D printer: I can take a few measurements, make a few drawings and send it to my printer to print out a new ring for my 30 year old vacuum so it sucks as good as new! Revolutionary from 1985? I think so!
Fast forward 5 years or so. I break a part on something, I go to a website, download the "digital" part and print it. A change like that hasn't evolved the parts supply chain, it has revolutionized it! The industry has changed it. New little niche markets have emerged and are starting to develop. The occupation of "tinker" has re-emerged as a technologist/maker with a van containing a few 3D printers, a CNC and a laser cutter and Internet connectivity. A new ability to fix/repair/recreate almost anything! It may become practical to actually fix things instead of throw them out. That's a revolution that might want to be stopped by big industries. Commodity products make money!
The dark side is that the average Joe will be turned into data, commoditized and monetized at many steps along this convenient path if not careful. I have mixed feelings about that.
Is this technology revolution good or bad for society in general - as with most technologies, it in itself is neutral, what is done with it is either good or bad and that is subjective and usually takes a while to show up.
30 years ago, I was single, living in an apartment outside Chicago, traveling around the country fixing mainframes. Now, I'm living in a small town in Ohio, married with a big house on a big lot with a mortgage and a 13 year old kid. I work out of my home office managing a team of developers in India working on applications for a company that is becoming more and more virtualized. I didn't see most of that coming, either!! :O) Those changes are more evolutionary though!
Hmmm... back in 1985 I had just started working at the Wall Street Journal in their "Satellite Operations" department. We had a "Scientific Atlanta" (IIRC) computer that we did our stuff on and that coordinated our communications channels. Shortly after that - can't remember the exact year, we bought a 10 Meg hard drive for the thing (it used to run strictly on 8" floppies!). We were all excited about this drive because none of us personally would have "ever" had the money to get a piece of shiny high tech like that on our own, but now we could play with it. We could hardly imagine "TEN MEGAbytes!". It fit a standard 19" rack, was about 7 inches thick, and a good 28" deep, weighing in at nearly 80 lbs.
Fast forward a very few years to a system we used to record the press-ready facsimiles of each WSJ page, called the DataBak system. It had 340MB hard drives. We could now fit two side-by side in a 19" rack, but they were each about 12" thick and about 30" deep, also weighing each near 80 lbs.
I have a drawer full of 64 GB microSD cards now. I'll have to calculate how many thousands of Petabytes I'd have if I had 80 lbs of those microSD cards.
I think that evolution becomes revolution sometimes, in retrospect. It's like watching your kids grow up, verses seeing the grandkid who lives a four hour flight away only once in a while. When you live with it, it seems gradual. When you're removed from it, and only see it at stages, it seems surprising.
I think a lot of tech is like that. And I'd venture to say that we do have, *in some areas*, the makings of a revolution in technology, but not in a lot of others. I watched us land on the moon and I was convinced - as were a lot of people then - that we'd have moon bases by now. I heard the announcements that we'd have Fusion Energy by now - unlimited, clean energy that would spur our economy and let us get out to the planets, and perhaps even the stars.
Nothing.
And as I watch the news, both foreign and domestic, I wonder how much of that is actually due to the limitations of technology, and how much is due to the limitations of our own sad human issues. How much of our resources we have to spend to keep ourselves safe (supposedly), or uphold/oppose some ideology, or to just try to hold people accountable so that they treat their own people like human beings.
But there's always folks who keep on plodding forward as best as they can, trying to ferret out the secrets that bring a revolution in technology. I keep close watch on the newest Fusion ideas, and I still get my hopes up when places like Lockheed Martin make an announcement about their fusion design that is very similar to the Polywell design (one I've researched in great depth and similar to my IEC Fusion hobby project) - so I have hope that maybe in the next 20 years, I'll start seeing some very hopeful advances, and with equal hope - seeing more advances in the longevity field that might make it so a lot of people on this forum could realistically see healthy years well past 100 - and who knows what technology will bring by then.
It's still an exciting time - there are still great possibilities, and hope.
Until about six or seven years ago there was one of those huge rack mount hard drives in a Data General Nova mini computer which was an essential part of the traffic light control system in Helsinki. For a couple of years it had been making horrible grinding noises, like a concrete mixer full of bricks. At that point they decided to upgrade the system.
In went our companies latest system. The sever being a Windows based box, the field units being Linux devices. Thing was despite it's wizzy new GUI and such it was functionally nothing more than that decades old minicomputer system.
In the few years since then things have moved on a bit. We can now monitor and control traffic lights all over Scandinavia form a web browser anywhere in the world. Traffic data has merger into "big data", congestion, emissions, accidents, forward planning for events. Control algorithms have become a lot more intelligent.
I think there is a growing realization that we are going nowhere in space. There is nowhere to go, so far we have found no sign that there is any place that is safe for humans out there. It seems almost certain that if there is it's far to far away to ever have any possibility of getting there. The universe is kind of big. Most of it is empty and the bits that are not are very hostile.
That realization of the utter hopelessness of it and the impeding drying up of resources and collapse of civilization, as opposed to the boundless science fiction induced optimism of the 1960's, casts a malaise over the human race and causes the young generations to hide away in the fabulous virtual worlds of computer games rather than to gaze at the stars in awe and wonder and dream of one day getting out there.
Yeah, yeah, I know, I have a very depressing outlook. Any juniors out there like to comment on my no doubt misguided observations?
My first technology job was maintaining the student registration "system" for a r1 university. We used punch cards, card sorters and reproducing punches to register 20,000 students. Programming was done with jumper wires. That was close to 50 years ago so I guess that qualifies me as a senior. In those days, university labs and machine shops were not locked. You just asked nicely and got to play with all kinds of amazing technology. Now it takes two factor authentication to get into a parking lot. As a child of the sixties my biggest disappointment is not where we are with technology, but rather where we are culturally and politically, but those are topics for a different forum.
Space travel and fusion did not quite happen on schedule. Now we have quantum entanglement, the technological singularity and nano fab to dream about. The technology we do have is adequately awesome to have exceeded my expectation in many areas.
you seem to be depressed and hopeless (for the greater humanity), lately.
I guess it is the long, cold, dark winter where you live. I felt the same in Germany sometimes, even if it is not as worse as in those northern parts of Europe, you are dwelling in.
Look - here in California we already have 20C in the daytime again. Europe Spring in January. I haven't seen ANY snow this year.
Somewhere in another thread I picked up that you may need to visit San Jose(?). Since the flight is usually some sort of torture, I advice you to stay as long as possible. 3 month works with tourist visa, 6 month possible.
Get your flight now and go back to your place when it is summer there again...
I could house you for a while and @Potatohead will probably too. Like that traveling part box we could send you from one member to the other. Just a question of organizing....
Senior, huh? Every now and then I get charged the "senior" price for a cup of coffee at McDonald's. I have mixed emotions about saving those 29 cents.
Welcome back, xanatos! You were gone for 2 months and it's great to hear from you again!
Since I'm fortunate enough to pass for 40 (at least when I haven't gone a day or two without shaving!) I'll take any discount I can get!
These forums are really great, sometimes I just haven't got anything to say that is of any value. Sometimes people point that out to me!
Heater - gloomy. "... utter hopelessness of it and the impeding drying up of resources and collapse of civilization..." A mature acknowledgement of the possible reality of this scenario is a good thing, but - for me - I try to balance that with the possibility that we just don't know everything there is to know yet. Possibilities are not closed for me until they have been conclusively demonstrated as impossible *in this universe for all time*. This is one reason why I embrace technology - there are much, much more intelligent people out there who are seriously researching things that will - if they're on to something real - redefine our notions of travel. Quantum Physics is immensely strange, non-intuitive, and FULL of mathematics that point to possibilities and functions that - while we don't know what to do with now - we will know - and use - 20, 50 or 100 years from now. In the last 100 years, look at the differences. 1915??? Are you kidding me???
Yes, these things may indeed be too far off for some folks, but not for others. But then so again might be the impeding drying up of resources and collapse of civilization. So - why not enjoy what we've got here now, try our best to maximize our enjoyment, and just possibly, be pleasantly surprised when we hear of a genuine breakthrough that makes a huge difference in our lives and our future.
At least I'm seeing technology in 2015, and not living in the grim reality of 1915 And so I get to play with Fusion, because, why not. At the very least, if I fuse some Deuterium into Helium3, I've changed the composition of the universe (in a VERY TINY way! ) for all time. Even the Pharisees didn't make a mark that'll last that long LOL!
The future is in many way not what I had hoped for but.... Every store in the country has "Star Trek Doors" that open when you walk up to them. I do wish they had that Great woosh sound though. They are too quiet. Instead of it being rare but not impossible to find a home without a TV and a telephone its now rare to find a home without a PC. Most kids probably have no idea why its called "dialing" a phone number. If you don't know look at some of the antique phones I used to use in the sixties. Today is Martin Luther King Day. Younger people might have no idea what that man really did. Civil Rights have for the most part come a very long way. Prejudice has changed. Don't know if its better or worse. It use to be primarily white people and their prejudices of Blacks. Now it seems that It still Whites vs blacks but also Blacks vs whites, Christians vs Muslims and anyone else who can be made into a group. I thought by now we would be free of prejudice. I thought the UN would be the world government with the countries more like the states of the US. I thought by now we wouldn't need roads anymore as we would all be flying from place to place in our own personal aircraft. (I am still working on "The Flying Carpet" a dream of a personal aircraft controlled by a propeller controller). As mentioned earlier some of the disappointments are the lack of advances in space and the reduction of our dependance on fossil fuels. Thats my two cents.
...to answer the question posed by the thread title:
No.
DaveJames has got it right... The future will always be tomorrow, not today. This thread is just trying to insult us Seniors.
Nonetheless, the world seems culturally divided between Westerners that live in anticipation of the future and other cultures that desire to preserve their past.
As best as I can figure out, we just have exponential growth of world-wide dismay at the outcomes. The future date that is arrived at is almost never what I had hoped for or expected. Thirty years ago, I never would have expected to be nicely retired and living happily in Taiwan. All the other stuff is merely tabloid amusements.
I think there is a growing realization that we are going nowhere in space. There is nowhere to go, so far we have found no sign that there is any place that is safe for humans out there. It seems almost certain that if there is it's far to far away to ever have any possibility of getting there. The universe is kind of big. Most of it is empty and the bits that are not are very hostile.
That realization of the utter hopelessness of it and the impeding drying up of resources and collapse of civilization, as opposed to the boundless science fiction induced optimism of the 1960's, casts a malaise over the human race and causes the young generations to hide away in the fabulous virtual worlds of computer games rather than to gaze at the stars in awe and wonder and dream of one day getting out there.
Yeah, yeah, I know, I have a very depressing outlook. Any juniors out there like to comment on my no doubt misguided observations?
At 62, I'm (sadly) not a junior, but while your outlook may be depressing, I think it's largely accurate. The science fiction writers seldom talked about the fact that there's a lot of radiation in space and that doing anything in space is really, really expensive. You can shield against the radiation but then moving all that mass gets even more expensive. Those two inconveniences have been enough to keep us close to home and likely will continue to do so.
Whether that should be sufficient to cause depression isn't clear. We seem to like challenges, and learning to live within the limits imposed by resources will certainly be challenging. Instead of going someplace else, the great accomplishments of the future might be to simply improve what we have.
Besides, depression may have gotten a bad rap. I once read it's only the depressed who are being realistic. Everyone else is in denial.
WRT the original question, this isn't the future we might have envisioned, but that doesn't mean nothing has changed. If I had to point to one thing as being a great advance, I'd say the accessibility of information. Those of us old enough to have worked before the internet existed might recall when many questions went unanswered simply because getting an answer would take too much effort. We used to have shelves full of databooks, and we went to libraries because we had to. More than once I made the 120-mile round trip to OpAmp Technical Books in Hollywood to buy some reference or textbook when I ran out of local resources. Now, that bookstore no longer exists because there's really no need for it. Today, if you don't know something, it's only because you haven't taken the time to learn it. Most of what you might want to know is available with a few mouse clicks. IMO, that's a very big change. Right up there with the invention of moveable type.
WRT the original question, this isn't the future we might have envisioned, but that doesn't mean nothing has changed. If I had to point to one thing as being a great advance, I'd say the accessibility of information. Those of us old enough to have worked before the internet existed might recall when many questions went unanswered simply because getting an answer would take too much effort. We used to have shelves full of databooks, and we went to libraries because we had to. More than once I made the 120-mile round trip to OpAmp Technical Books in Hollywood to buy some reference or textbook when I ran out of local resources. Now, that bookstore no longer exists because there's really no need for it. Today, if you don't know something, it's only because you haven't taken the time to learn it. Most of what you might want to know is available with a few mouse clicks. IMO, that's a very big change. Right up there with the invention of moveable type.
Yes, that has changed dramatically. On the other hand, there's not much thrill in looking up information on the internet.. although occasionally one'll run into an especially interesting web page, about some project or something. But I remember going to London in 1978, I think it was, and finding a shop in Tottenham Court Road which not only had lots of microcomputer stuff but also great books from e.g. Sybex. Programming the 6502 by Zax, for example. I filled up my suitcase with books until I couldn't fit more in. What a treasure. I continued hunting books other places over the next years, it was always a great feeling to find a good technical book. The one that thought me how to write compilers, for example. Reading this stuff on the net isn't the same at all, for some reason.
Reading this stuff on the net isn't the same at all, for some reason.
I have finally accepted that reading will never be the same as it was in the 1960s.
And the hunt for a good book in a great technical book store may no longer be possible.
But university bookstores and univeristy libraries still remain wonderful places to explore.
+++++++++++++++++++++++
There is joy to be had in what the past 50 years or so has brought to us.
I am finally finding things online to read that are free and rather rare books that have been copied into PDF format.
And my reading electronically has evolved into new methods to read and scan for info.
It is handy to have a search function if one can learn to use it intelligently.
Still, I just am a bit disappointed that recyclers are the bane of junk store and used book stores.
We seem to dispatch the old and in the way clutter to some sort of reprocessing without allowing much exploration of more creative uses.
Today, if you don't know something, it's only because you haven't taken the time to learn it. Most of what you might want to know is available with a few mouse clicks.
Sort of true but, in the extreme that implies we don't need schools and teachers anymore. Just give kids a web browser at age five and let them get on with it.
Donald Rumsfeld had this covered:
... we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know.
We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know.
But there are also unknown unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know.
So there we have it. The key is in the "Most of what you might want to know". How do you know what you want to know?
Everyone knows something. They will click around links on the net to read about that. That might raise questions in their minds that causes them to click on further links around the topic. That is great.
But then there is that vast ocean of "unknown unknowns" that they will never encounter. Because the don't know it is out there. They might stumble across it by accident but when they do they might back away because it is so incomprehensible.
That is why, since for ever, we have had schools. So that we can sit kids down and forcibly expose them to ideas they might never come across otherwise.
As Jazzed, says "Learning how to learn things should be a goal of education ". We have to "bootstrap" kids some how.
Of course this is not about just you kids, all of us have that vast ocean of "unknown unknowns" which may be very interesting and useful but which we are never going to fall into by clicking around the net.
Sort of true but, in the extreme that implies we don't need schools and teachers anymore. Just give kids a web browser at age five and let them get on with it.
Donald Rumsfeld had this covered:
So there we have it. The key is in the "Most of what you might want to know". How do you know what you want to know?
Everyone knows something. They will click around links on the net to read about that. That might raise questions in their minds that causes them to click on further links around the topic. That is great.
But then there is that vast ocean of "unknown unknowns" that they will never encounter. Because the don't know it is out there. They might stumble across it by accident but when they do they might back away because it is so incomprehensible.
That is why, since for ever, we have had schools. So that we can sit kids down and forcibly expose them to ideas they might never come across otherwise.
As Jazzed, says "Learning how to learn things should be a goal of education ". We have to "bootstrap" kids some how.
Of course this is not about just you kids, all of us have that vast ocean of "unknown unknowns" which may be very interesting and useful but which we are never going to fall into by clicking around the net.
Heater - LOL. You really had to stretch this time. Should we have a show of hands of everyone who interpreted my comments to mean that we should abolish schools and just hand kids a browser?
[Edit] OK, maybe that's a bit snippy. I don't think I implied that we should abolish schools and I wasn't suggesting the process be based on some random wandering around the web. We all see or hear references to things we might want to know more about. Just reading the news will usually raise such questions. Doing any sort of technical job certainly presents us with the need to find information and there's nothing random about it. What we're doing provides the impetus and direction needed to make productive use of web resources. In the old days, finding that information was much more difficult than it is today, and I think that's a revolutionary change. YMMV.
Learning how to learn things should be a goal of education ....
Yep. And, to my fortune, that was exactly what they did at the tech school I went to (before my final engineering school year). Everything was focused around that goal: To teach the students how they should go about learning things for themselves. What to do if you don't know something. How to collaborate with others. How to use books, tools, equipment, knowledge, people, to figure it out. We had tests several times a week, and we could use anything and everything to assist with the test: Books, notes, other students. Those of us who finished early went on to help others. It worked great. The frequent tests taught us what we didn't know or understand yet, as well as how to go about learning it. The only test that year which wasn't done that way was the final exam. Which was a breeze for most of us, of course.
I'm eternally greatful for that education. It made a big difference when I started working. I've seen so many co-workers who don't know what to do if there's something they don't know. They didn't learn how to learn things - that wasn't part of their education.
Actually you are right, I was being over the top in my response to your comment on learning via the net.
The accessibility of information we enjoy today is as you say a great advance. Incredibly so.
Sometimes I have a little worry about the fact that I can no longer function without a web browser, Google and of course the rest of the internet.
When I first ever heard of Google, it was still a couple PC's lashed together under a desk at Stanford, I made my first search with it, for "plesiosynchronous digital hierarchy". Wow, I got an excellent result. What harm could there be in one little search? Now look at me, a totally helpless net dependent junkie.
That worry mostly passes when I assume that the internet will always be there. If for some reason it were not there one day then our problems will be much bigger than me not being able to google some detail of an API I'm using whilst programming.
Comments
Around 1969 I was told by very earnest and informed individuals that by 1985 there would be no more petroleum. This really worried me! My father almost laughed at my concerns. Fast forward to 2015 and there is still plenty of petroleum...in addition to many viable electric vehicles (that are here well before we need them).
Having been fooled once, I'm practically immune to doom and gloom predictions.
On another note, who in the world would want to go back to 90V primary cells??? What a waste of resources! What a cumbersome, expensive way to listen to music! Who even uses AM or FM radio for their music? I'm certainly not going to haul a tube radio and carbon-zinc batteries up a 12,000' mountain. I'm very happy with my tiny MP3 that has on it every song on it I ever liked, and is powered by the same NiMH AAA that it started with years ago. I can even charge the cell with a $5 plastic solar panel.
Nah, you can have the past!
For the audiophile talk. Koss Porta Pro was going strong 30 years ago, and so does it right now, no matter how many beats were beaten by various doctors
And not just one battery. Back in the early days of radio, "modern" receivers were large wooden boxes with up to 3 different batteries (A, B, and C): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_(vacuum_tube)
It was not uncommon for one of those batteries to leak acid and ruin the carpet under a console radio. Thus, the radio stayed in place. Earth and long wire antenna connections also required. No mobile radios back then for a variety of reasons!
From http://antiqueradio.org/bsupply.htm: "Lead acid cells could leak acid, which might drip out of the radio cabinet onto your lovely Persian rug. Worst of all, if you accidentally reversed the A and B battery connectors, you could fry your radio's precious tubes."
Crosley Radio Instructions: http://web.archive.org/web/20120224182730/http://users.erols.com/radiola/C51man.htm
As for music, a lot of people, myself included, agree. Radio is a great technology for more than music. And it is still very difficult to beat for talk, news, drama, sports.
Digital Mondale is crappy. However, C-Quam stereo was and in a few places still is pretty great for the same kinds of programs. I have one in my truck. People who hear a sportscaster nearly always comment.
For bad times, radio is extremely robust. We do not have a comparable tech replacement.
For the entertainment use case, we have a lot of superior replacements. Podcast, mp3, etc... I am a huge user of audio material, and we live in very good times.
Once, I bought an AM stereo kit and used it with my truck radio as well as older tube units. That mass in the cabinet still does what it has always done.
Re: artifacts.
Yes. OTA broadcasters can and often do send us an excellent, near artifact free signal. We get to see the potential at least. Everybody else made the choice tradeoff at the expense of quality, and it is all ugly to me. Cable can be the worst. I see blocks all the time.
I just quit watching.
For the answer as to why, consider this:
Two choices. One crappy quality but compelling, the other pristine and boring. Which do you use?
That is why I quit watching.
And I am better for it too, but the artifacts still suck.
Good score! If he had a Philco Predicta TV there, I would have grabbed one. I have two now.
We must be nearly the same age, I graduated high school in 1978.
Yesterday, my daughter sucked up some water with my vintage 1983 Sears mini canister vacuum and ruined the bag (the vacuum seems to have survived). Being the last bag we had. this morning, I sat down at my computer and ordered 8 new bags that will be on my doorstep Tuesday. Total shopping time - 5 minutes while I enjoyed my coffee.
If this was 1985 and I needed to purchase bags, I would have to drive 30-45 minutes through suburban Chicago traffic to the mall go into the Sears store, buy the bags and then drive home again. Total shopping time about 2 hours.
Time saved about 1:55. The value of an effortless shopping experience? Dare I say, priceless? Having almost 2 hours in my day to pursue some other endeavor?
Is that Revolutionary? Did I see this coming back in 1983 when I bought the vacuum? Are all the things that went into making that possible just the beginning? I think so.
Take it a step further, while riding with a friend's car, I relate this story and am reminded that I need vacuum bags. I have my tablet with me but alas it doesn't have any internet access except WiFi. Not to worry, my friend has a connected car that creates a WiFi hotspot. I go to Amazon, find the bags, order them and they will still be on my doorstep on Tuesday...all this done while motoring along the highway. Did we see any of that realistically coming in 1985?
While looking at the vacuum, I noticed the little ring that fits on the hose to cover a hole controlling suction was missing - what to do, the vacuum is 30 years old. Fast forward a couple months when I have my 3D printer: I can take a few measurements, make a few drawings and send it to my printer to print out a new ring for my 30 year old vacuum so it sucks as good as new! Revolutionary from 1985? I think so!
Fast forward 5 years or so. I break a part on something, I go to a website, download the "digital" part and print it. A change like that hasn't evolved the parts supply chain, it has revolutionized it! The industry has changed it. New little niche markets have emerged and are starting to develop. The occupation of "tinker" has re-emerged as a technologist/maker with a van containing a few 3D printers, a CNC and a laser cutter and Internet connectivity. A new ability to fix/repair/recreate almost anything! It may become practical to actually fix things instead of throw them out. That's a revolution that might want to be stopped by big industries. Commodity products make money!
The dark side is that the average Joe will be turned into data, commoditized and monetized at many steps along this convenient path if not careful. I have mixed feelings about that.
Is this technology revolution good or bad for society in general - as with most technologies, it in itself is neutral, what is done with it is either good or bad and that is subjective and usually takes a while to show up.
30 years ago, I was single, living in an apartment outside Chicago, traveling around the country fixing mainframes. Now, I'm living in a small town in Ohio, married with a big house on a big lot with a mortgage and a 13 year old kid. I work out of my home office managing a team of developers in India working on applications for a company that is becoming more and more virtualized. I didn't see most of that coming, either!! :O) Those changes are more evolutionary though!
Fast forward a very few years to a system we used to record the press-ready facsimiles of each WSJ page, called the DataBak system. It had 340MB hard drives. We could now fit two side-by side in a 19" rack, but they were each about 12" thick and about 30" deep, also weighing each near 80 lbs.
I have a drawer full of 64 GB microSD cards now. I'll have to calculate how many thousands of Petabytes I'd have if I had 80 lbs of those microSD cards.
I think that evolution becomes revolution sometimes, in retrospect. It's like watching your kids grow up, verses seeing the grandkid who lives a four hour flight away only once in a while. When you live with it, it seems gradual. When you're removed from it, and only see it at stages, it seems surprising.
I think a lot of tech is like that. And I'd venture to say that we do have, *in some areas*, the makings of a revolution in technology, but not in a lot of others. I watched us land on the moon and I was convinced - as were a lot of people then - that we'd have moon bases by now. I heard the announcements that we'd have Fusion Energy by now - unlimited, clean energy that would spur our economy and let us get out to the planets, and perhaps even the stars.
Nothing.
And as I watch the news, both foreign and domestic, I wonder how much of that is actually due to the limitations of technology, and how much is due to the limitations of our own sad human issues. How much of our resources we have to spend to keep ourselves safe (supposedly), or uphold/oppose some ideology, or to just try to hold people accountable so that they treat their own people like human beings.
But there's always folks who keep on plodding forward as best as they can, trying to ferret out the secrets that bring a revolution in technology. I keep close watch on the newest Fusion ideas, and I still get my hopes up when places like Lockheed Martin make an announcement about their fusion design that is very similar to the Polywell design (one I've researched in great depth and similar to my IEC Fusion hobby project) - so I have hope that maybe in the next 20 years, I'll start seeing some very hopeful advances, and with equal hope - seeing more advances in the longevity field that might make it so a lot of people on this forum could realistically see healthy years well past 100 - and who knows what technology will bring by then.
It's still an exciting time - there are still great possibilities, and hope.
In went our companies latest system. The sever being a Windows based box, the field units being Linux devices. Thing was despite it's wizzy new GUI and such it was functionally nothing more than that decades old minicomputer system.
In the few years since then things have moved on a bit. We can now monitor and control traffic lights all over Scandinavia form a web browser anywhere in the world. Traffic data has merger into "big data", congestion, emissions, accidents, forward planning for events. Control algorithms have become a lot more intelligent.
Things do seem to have accelerated recently.
That realization of the utter hopelessness of it and the impeding drying up of resources and collapse of civilization, as opposed to the boundless science fiction induced optimism of the 1960's, casts a malaise over the human race and causes the young generations to hide away in the fabulous virtual worlds of computer games rather than to gaze at the stars in awe and wonder and dream of one day getting out there.
Yeah, yeah, I know, I have a very depressing outlook. Any juniors out there like to comment on my no doubt misguided observations?
Space travel and fusion did not quite happen on schedule. Now we have quantum entanglement, the technological singularity and nano fab to dream about. The technology we do have is adequately awesome to have exceeded my expectation in many areas.
Welcome back, xanatos! You were gone for 2 months and it's great to hear from you again!
you seem to be depressed and hopeless (for the greater humanity), lately.
I guess it is the long, cold, dark winter where you live. I felt the same in Germany sometimes, even if it is not as worse as in those northern parts of Europe, you are dwelling in.
Look - here in California we already have 20C in the daytime again. Europe Spring in January. I haven't seen ANY snow this year.
Somewhere in another thread I picked up that you may need to visit San Jose(?). Since the flight is usually some sort of torture, I advice you to stay as long as possible. 3 month works with tourist visa, 6 month possible.
Get your flight now and go back to your place when it is summer there again...
I could house you for a while and @Potatohead will probably too. Like that traveling part box we could send you from one member to the other. Just a question of organizing....
Save Heater!
Enjoy!
Mike
No.
Since I'm fortunate enough to pass for 40 (at least when I haven't gone a day or two without shaving!) I'll take any discount I can get!
These forums are really great, sometimes I just haven't got anything to say that is of any value. Sometimes people point that out to me!
Heater - gloomy. "... utter hopelessness of it and the impeding drying up of resources and collapse of civilization..." A mature acknowledgement of the possible reality of this scenario is a good thing, but - for me - I try to balance that with the possibility that we just don't know everything there is to know yet. Possibilities are not closed for me until they have been conclusively demonstrated as impossible *in this universe for all time*. This is one reason why I embrace technology - there are much, much more intelligent people out there who are seriously researching things that will - if they're on to something real - redefine our notions of travel. Quantum Physics is immensely strange, non-intuitive, and FULL of mathematics that point to possibilities and functions that - while we don't know what to do with now - we will know - and use - 20, 50 or 100 years from now. In the last 100 years, look at the differences. 1915??? Are you kidding me???
Yes, these things may indeed be too far off for some folks, but not for others. But then so again might be the impeding drying up of resources and collapse of civilization. So - why not enjoy what we've got here now, try our best to maximize our enjoyment, and just possibly, be pleasantly surprised when we hear of a genuine breakthrough that makes a huge difference in our lives and our future.
At least I'm seeing technology in 2015, and not living in the grim reality of 1915
DaveJames has got it right... The future will always be tomorrow, not today. This thread is just trying to insult us Seniors.
Nonetheless, the world seems culturally divided between Westerners that live in anticipation of the future and other cultures that desire to preserve their past.
As best as I can figure out, we just have exponential growth of world-wide dismay at the outcomes. The future date that is arrived at is almost never what I had hoped for or expected. Thirty years ago, I never would have expected to be nicely retired and living happily in Taiwan. All the other stuff is merely tabloid amusements.
Whether that should be sufficient to cause depression isn't clear. We seem to like challenges, and learning to live within the limits imposed by resources will certainly be challenging. Instead of going someplace else, the great accomplishments of the future might be to simply improve what we have.
Besides, depression may have gotten a bad rap. I once read it's only the depressed who are being realistic. Everyone else is in denial.
WRT the original question, this isn't the future we might have envisioned, but that doesn't mean nothing has changed. If I had to point to one thing as being a great advance, I'd say the accessibility of information. Those of us old enough to have worked before the internet existed might recall when many questions went unanswered simply because getting an answer would take too much effort. We used to have shelves full of databooks, and we went to libraries because we had to. More than once I made the 120-mile round trip to OpAmp Technical Books in Hollywood to buy some reference or textbook when I ran out of local resources. Now, that bookstore no longer exists because there's really no need for it. Today, if you don't know something, it's only because you haven't taken the time to learn it. Most of what you might want to know is available with a few mouse clicks. IMO, that's a very big change. Right up there with the invention of moveable type.
I have finally accepted that reading will never be the same as it was in the 1960s.
And the hunt for a good book in a great technical book store may no longer be possible.
But university bookstores and univeristy libraries still remain wonderful places to explore.
+++++++++++++++++++++++
There is joy to be had in what the past 50 years or so has brought to us.
I am finally finding things online to read that are free and rather rare books that have been copied into PDF format.
And my reading electronically has evolved into new methods to read and scan for info.
It is handy to have a search function if one can learn to use it intelligently.
Still, I just am a bit disappointed that recyclers are the bane of junk store and used book stores.
We seem to dispatch the old and in the way clutter to some sort of reprocessing without allowing much exploration of more creative uses.
Everything happens faster these days.
Donald Rumsfeld had this covered: So there we have it. The key is in the "Most of what you might want to know". How do you know what you want to know?
Everyone knows something. They will click around links on the net to read about that. That might raise questions in their minds that causes them to click on further links around the topic. That is great.
But then there is that vast ocean of "unknown unknowns" that they will never encounter. Because the don't know it is out there. They might stumble across it by accident but when they do they might back away because it is so incomprehensible.
That is why, since for ever, we have had schools. So that we can sit kids down and forcibly expose them to ideas they might never come across otherwise.
As Jazzed, says "Learning how to learn things should be a goal of education ". We have to "bootstrap" kids some how.
Of course this is not about just you kids, all of us have that vast ocean of "unknown unknowns" which may be very interesting and useful but which we are never going to fall into by clicking around the net.
[Edit] OK, maybe that's a bit snippy. I don't think I implied that we should abolish schools and I wasn't suggesting the process be based on some random wandering around the web. We all see or hear references to things we might want to know more about. Just reading the news will usually raise such questions. Doing any sort of technical job certainly presents us with the need to find information and there's nothing random about it. What we're doing provides the impetus and direction needed to make productive use of web resources. In the old days, finding that information was much more difficult than it is today, and I think that's a revolutionary change. YMMV.
I'm eternally greatful for that education. It made a big difference when I started working. I've seen so many co-workers who don't know what to do if there's something they don't know. They didn't learn how to learn things - that wasn't part of their education.
Actually you are right, I was being over the top in my response to your comment on learning via the net.
The accessibility of information we enjoy today is as you say a great advance. Incredibly so.
Sometimes I have a little worry about the fact that I can no longer function without a web browser, Google and of course the rest of the internet.
When I first ever heard of Google, it was still a couple PC's lashed together under a desk at Stanford, I made my first search with it, for "plesiosynchronous digital hierarchy". Wow, I got an excellent result. What harm could there be in one little search? Now look at me, a totally helpless net dependent junkie.
That worry mostly passes when I assume that the internet will always be there. If for some reason it were not there one day then our problems will be much bigger than me not being able to google some detail of an API I'm using whilst programming.