Skip to main content

Mega Tech - Ed. Daniel Franklin ***

It's almost impossible to review a book like this without quoting Niels Bohr, who (amongst others) said 'Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future,' so I'm not going to try. 

In principle, futurology is the most hilarious part of science writing, as it is so entertaining when unworldly academics get their predictions wonderfully wrong. (Dresses made from paper will be the norm by 2000, Dr Toffler? Really?) Yet strangely, in practice, futurology tends not to be very amusing because the books are almost always unbelievably dull to read.

To an extent, Mega Tech gets over this by having lots of short pieces by different authors. I am often critical of the 'piecemeal appraisal' approach to a topic, because the essays rarely integrate well, but at least here it means there are nuggets of gold amongst the mediocre - notably, for example, Ann Winblad's ideas on computing based on her early experience with Bill Gates and Ryan Avent's take on the socioeconomic impact of technological development and innovation. I was also fascinated by the essay on military technology, which captured me at the start with the remarkable statistic that the current record for a sniper using a rifle is a British soldier who, in Afghanistan in 2009, shot two Taliban machine-gunners from a distance of 2,475 metres. That's further than my walk to the post office.

Even so, some of the suggestions here already seem wide of the mark. A couple of frontrunners mentioned are virtual reality and voice interaction with technology. Both are promising, yet the authors fail to recognise that it's almost always the case that such technologies end up in a very different form to the early versions. They really need to learn the lesson I got from attending the Windows 95 launch over 20 years ago. Microsoft confidently told us in 1995 that the internet would remain a university and military domain, while the commercial future was with the commercial networks of the likes of AOL, Compuserve and Microsoft's newly launched MSN. That went well.

Looking at the two examples I mention, virtual reality will definitely catch on, but I suspect that it will come in two forms. The book simply carries forward current headsets, but those may well only ever have a significant presence in gaming and the short-term use spaces like cinemas, not, as Mega Tech suggests, replacing our general screen use. Look at 3D TV. As I write, manufacturer after manufacturer is pulling out of 3D television production. Very few people wanted it. We're happy to wear 3D glasses to watch a 2 hour movie in the cinema, but not for our mainstream screen use. Apart from anything else, when watching the TV, we talk to others, interact with phones, eat and drink... we don't want something clamped on our face while doing this. Virtual reality in this environment is only likely to become the norm when we can do it without strapping something on.

As for voice interaction, it's brilliant, but Mega Tech doesn't do enough to reflect its limitations. I wouldn't be without my Amazon Echo - but the book claims voice input will soon replace old-fashioned keyboards and mice/trackpads. This is only true for a subset of uses. Firstly, voice struggles outside the commonplace. I spent a hilarious ten minutes trying to get the Echo to play Schoenberg's Verklärte Nacht. I failed. Voice won't cope with this for a long time. And secondly, while many of us might be happy to dictate a tweet, have you ever tried to edit text by voice? Imagine it: 'The word "the", hang on... erm... sixteen, no, seventeen lines down on the current page, the second occurrence on the line, should actually be "thee" with a second "e" at the end of the word' is never going to seem convenient when compared with a click on the mouse and a single keypress.

Overall, this was one of the better futurology books I've read. There were large chunks that needed skim reading to avoid them becoming tedious, but there were some really captivating points too. Indubitably most of it was wrong - but, as the introduction points out, that doesn't stop it being worthwhile speculating... as long as no one takes this as a true picture of the future.


Paperback:  

Kindle 
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Beyond Belief - Helen Pearson *****

Apparently it comes as a surprise to many that medicine was not particularly scientific until the end of the twentieth century (to be honest, it's no surprise to me - we had a GP who used homeopathy in the 90s). Instead it was based on anecdotal guidance - the kind of thing that appeared to work. Evidence-based medicine has since improved the field, trying where possible to base decisions on evidence, ideally based on randomised controlled trials. The first part of Helen Pearson's book covers this well - though I think it's by far the least interesting part of what we discover. Instead what's truly fascinating is the rest of it, looking at a wide range of other fields where evidence was rarely properly used and that are only now starting to dip a toe in the water. These include social policy, policing, conservation, business and education. The main part of the book gives us examples of how bad these areas have been in terms of basing decisions on what's always been ...

The Random Universe - Andrew Jaffe *****

This is an absolutely fascinating book for anyone interested in the way that science really works, bearing in mind the difficulties of having to base our models and theories on induction. Andrew Jaffe introduces the difficulties we face when trying to take a scientific view because largely we are dependent on induction: predicting the future from what has previously been observed. He explores what probability is, the two key ways of looking at it (frequentist and Bayesian) and how scientists use (or misuse it) to work out the implications of their experiments for hypotheses. This is then expanded into looking at the nature of scientific models and the philosophy of science before heading out to entropy, quantum randomness and attempting to achieve meaningful cosmology with its potential dearth of evidence.  The topic might sound a little dry, but in fact Jaffe does it with good humour and a very readable style. For example, he uses measuring his daughter's height by making marks on...

God: the Science, the Evidence - Michel-Yves Bolloré and Olivier Bonnassies ***

This is, to say the least, an oddity, but a fascinating one. A translation of a French bestseller, it aims to put forward an examination of the scientific evidence for the existence of a deity… and various other things, as this is a very oddly structured book (more on that in a moment). In The God Delusion , Richard Dawkins suggested that we should treat the existence of God as a scientific claim, which is exactly what the authors do reasonably well in the main part of the book. They argue that three pieces of scientific evidence in particular are supportive of the existence of a (generic) creator of the universe. These are that the universe had a beginning, the fine tuning of natural constants and the unlikeliness of life.  To support their evidence, Bolloré and Bonnassies give a reasonable introduction to thermodynamics and cosmology. They suggest that the expected heat death of the universe implies a beginning (for good thermodynamic reasons), and rightly give the impression tha...