1986-2006 -- 20 years2006-2026 -- 20 yearsHow come technology hasn't progressed since 2006 but leapt ahead enormously between 1986 and 2006?
>corporate world>headsetlmao, is that how low level sales copes?
>>108823533They don't realize it's not the corporate world because all they know is fast food and retail.
>>1088235161622 - 1822 -- 200 years1822 - 2022 -- 200 yearsHow come mathe hasn't progressed since 1822, but leapt enormously between 1622 and 1822?FUCK OFF YOU STUPID RETARD. Have you not considered the exponentially increasing complexity of the things we need to achieve to have "progress"Bait status: taken. Fuck you.
AI is literally the biggest technological improvement since the internet what are you talking about
>>1088235162016-2026 feels identical but you are genuinely retarded if you think the world didn't change dramatically between 2006-2016
>>108823937Yeah. I can't think of any differences really between 2016 and now other than ai
>>108823937The 2016 election and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.
>>108823549But math has progressed more in the last 200 years. You are just braindead
>>1088241741. Gen AI/transformers are a big one since they are now beating pretty much every model, even in drug discovery MAMMAL (a full pipeline model) beats alphafold 3.2. mRNA vaccines, you only hear about them from /pol/ talking nonsense, but in reality they effectively end many viruses and cancers3. CRISPR-Cas9 finally makes gene editing possible. (it's not surprising that most recent are medical because of the age of the population)4. James Webb space telescope, is a genuine technological and scientific marvel in the methods we use to look further into space. You'll find that just like the 60s lots of technological progress (who needs to go to the moon) was hotly politicized and debated (mRNA, AI, fusion, quantum computing, reusable rockets, brain-computer interfaces, peptides in general)Since this happens for everything nowadays it can make genuine breakthroughs feel mundane or pointless.
>>108823516Old men used to oppose computing, they didn't think the internet, mice, or phones as computers were worth pursuing. The old money was made in banking, or real estate, and while there have always been companies manufacturing heavy machinery, it was always slow and costly compared to building a house/apartments/buildings and passively charging rent or issuing loans when the main source of money >was< provided at low or no interest, which you could turn around lend a secondary time at higher rates.
>>108824183You're right. Instead of having a nice slow boil to the kind of world we wanted, instead the backwards racists got their megaphone in office to make them feel like their terrible opinions matter. So we had to try speeding up things to keep the undesirables disenfranchised and replaced with easily manipulated foreigners and it's not gone well. Decades of work down the drain. At least we can still say that whites will become a minority in America.
>>108823516>How come technology hasn't progressed since 2006 but leapt ahead enormously between 1986 and 2006?Technology has progressed immensely from 2006, you just don't notice because most things from 2006 are either still here, have become more advanced in their form or downgraded for the sake of simplicity, i.e. smartphones, laptops, operating systems, consoles, the internet itself, cars, tvs, etc.1986-2006 is just as big of a leap with the exception of new types of devices being introduced, most people in 2006 didn't use the internet or if they did it was for a very specific purpose in a set location instead of being omnipresent 24/7.Most people in 2006 still lived like it was the 80s or 90s, The period between 2013-2019 was unironically the most progressive period in recent decades and was the time society radically changed in the way it functioned, with the 2020s all blurring together being a dystopian extension of that timeline.
>>108823937the difference between 2016 and 2026 through inflation alone is like an entire different world
Didn't people come to a conclusion that hardware has advanced but software has stagnated? Or is it the other way around?
>>108826275both have stagnated on top of being bloated.
>>108826312Don't be such a pessimist, dude, don't do that
>>108826275Hardware has advanced and software has regressed. Higher system requirements, dramatically larger install sizes, and worse performance than the same program from 5 years ago
its just progressing in other areas. the telephone network progressed a ton between 1980 and 2000 but not much has changed since then as far as switching systems are concerned. All we've really gotten since then is more coverage and speeds but as far as the backbone is concerned all we've gotten is STIR/SHAKEN. Even the IP network hasn't changed much. Most advancements aren't consumer facing. Currently I'd guess most money is in biomedical engineering and renewable energy engineering. There should be less advancements for consumers. That shit is gay
>>108826047Alphafold 3 uses transformers. There are no useable models in drug discovery whatsoever. MAMMAL is a joke and is far worse than anything else around. IBM has been a patent trolling and india-tier scam company for several decades. Literally everything they come up with is fake. How do I know? I have a PhD in that stuff, I work specifically in computational nanobody design, I am often in touch with people at AZ, GSK and Amgen. The current success rate in nanobody design is 0.1%, and that is echoed by my peers at these institutions. The papers pretend it's around 60% though. The closest to something that works is bindcraft, except bindcraft makes sticky binders, a problem that has always been known with small proteins (meaning it binds to the target, but also binds to literally everything else in the world, thus is totally useless. But still, at least it does bind things, unlike other methods!)We instead developed a data-driven method that uses principled deep learning algorithms in some phases for things like template search and "smoothing". This method actually works and we can get good quality starting points (low affinity, specific) binders much better than anyone else (we then just do phage display to finish, ezpz).mRNA vaccines remain dangerous, as shown in Sanofi's recent COMPARE trial and others. They are also widely ineffective in most cases. Furthermore, just like cracking binding or affinity or specificity etc. in the above would not fix drug discovery as a whole, mRNA is payload + delivery. Both are faulty, but it doesn't solve the 'deliver where' problem (target id/reprio), or 'deliver what'.CRISPR-based techs no comments there. The off-target risk is totally overblown. The problem is social/regulatory, and actually understanding what to tune where. It's all upsides.Don't know enough about James Webb to comment, but still waiting for useful results from it.
>>108826193We're talking about the developed world, not India. Go back whence you came, Pajeet.
>>108826275More like >>108826447 said, also the kinds of advancements are very different. Remember the "moar cores" meme from the amd vs intel days when intel was raping amd's crappy CPUs? Hardware has basically only been this for quite a while. There's actually a bit of a renaissance in hardware brought in by AI as people are trying to make AI chips (but it's too specialized and too ponzi schemy to lead to long-term use I think). Before, there were wild differences between architectures, system organization, and subsystems. Now it's all very much homogeneous, and not entirely for technical reasons.
>>108826846There's actually fuckall money in bio-anything right now. This year is the worst year for funding in over 40 years. Last year was more normal (but still low) but 2 years ago was also terrible. And it doesn't seem to be coming back up. This is both private and public funding.
All we did was speed things up digitally so you need less humans and can do most things without going outside
>>108823937>2016-2026 feels identicalI don't remember playing AAA gayms on an iGPU in 2016.
>>108827559Because you were 10 years old then.
>>108826447>software has regressedMeme. Doom Etetnal is far better optimized than Crysis, for instance.
>>108827563Even if this were true, my argument still stands.
>>108827884Your argument is that you were retarded and didn't know any better. You can't play any AAA games today on iGPUs, except mobile slop ported to PCs.
>>108827912t. legit retard stuck in 2012
>>108823516A combination of factors.Market saturation - while a market is still growing there's more experimentation and rapid progress, once everyone has a certain category of product (car, fridge, TV etc.) things tend to stagnate until the next big thing comes along.Reaching the biological limits of what's necessary - we went from touch screens operated with a stylus to a finger to two fingers, to three fingers, but once you get 10 finger touch screens anything higher than that is pointless. Same with sound we went from square wave, to polyphony to CD audio quality and everything else becomes kinda pointless, same with colour screens from monochrome to 16 color to 256 to 16 bit to 32 bit, same with screen DPI on phones and many other examples.At some point a problem is essentially "solved" and anything more is just marginal improvement at best. Changing market incentives - once the market is saturated and sales stagnate corporations start to shift to other profit models, usually worse for the consumers - planned obsolescence, subscriptions, selling your data etc.Changing demographics - companies get filled with quantity over quality hires, indians with fake credentials hire other indians until even the CEO is indian and the company enters a state of steady, managed decline.
>>108823516>How come technology hasn't progressed since 2006Being disingenuous used to be a sin and people got killed for it. Maybe that practice should come back.
>>108827962Show me your FPS in 1080p (let alone a real resolution) playing, say, Forza Horizon 6 on your igpu at max resolutionIf you backpedal, you automatically fail. You could play the latest AAA slop in 2010 on igpus at low res minimum settings at 20 fps just fine.
>>108828171One of the most popular handhelds sold nowadays can do it.
>>1088235162006 was literally 8 years agoStop lying, chud
>>108828207OK thanks for surrendering so nicely. Don't forget to tell your special needs nurse to wipe the drool off your face.
>>108827559>AAA gaymsterrible argument since game graphic had not significantly improved in those ten years, whatever slight improvements just came with a disproportionately massive computational cost
>>108823533Everyone wears headsets in corpo world anon, to listen to music, for meetings or to simply block noise
>>108823516i blame js
>>108823516No technological progress is linear, it's like asking why aviation developed so much between the '20s and the '80s compared to from the '80s to today, it's simply that breakthrough points are reached from time to time and you see vast improvements in that sector, until a certain physical limit is approached (see transistors or AI scaling) and long plateaus follow
>>108828848Both statements are nonsense. We had BETTER aviation tech in the 90s than we do today. Transport today is globally SLOWER than it used to be. It's also more expensive.The same is true in software and to a lesser extent hardware.Progress is not linear, it's exponential. We have instead seen asymptotic for decades.
>>108827478Would one of those sticky binders work as a more advanced superglue than cyanoacrylate?
>>108827878Yeah and Rollercoaster Tycoon is better optimized than doom eternal. We can pick cherries all day anon, then go out to a nice cafe afterwards, maybe catch a movie
>>108829682It is possible to miniproteins for these kinds of applications, just like you can use sericin for glue, but the stickiness property mentioned is not enough for this. Different but related chemistry.
>>108827878It really isn't though. You can have orders of magnitudes more things onscreen at the same fps in crysis. Furthermore, that would not be a good point either. "The exception that proves the rule" is a common expression for a reason.
>>108827478There's a fair chance you know someone I know. Your research interests overlap with his pretty closely. Weird.
>>108823516lol u dont beg for tasks, you fucking fix shit and show the result. Lazy niggers
