I recently was assigned an article in Interface Design class called “As We May Think” written by Vannevar Bush in 1945. This is an amazingly insightful article for the time it was written, as he is on more than one instance discussing the concept of computers without actually saying the word “computer”. To be honest, I thought it was a modern technology article until he started talking about things like film.
“For their own purposes the physicists promptly constructed thermionic-tube equipment capable of counting electrical impulses at the rate of 100,000 a second. The advanced arithmetical machines of the future will be electrical in nature, and they will perform at 100 times present speeds, or more.”
My laptop is 2.33 GHz = 2,330,000,000 Hz, not too far off from his prediction.
“It is a far cry from the abacus to the modern keyboard accounting machine. It will be an equal step to the arithmetical machine of the future. But even this new machine will not take the scientist where he needs to go. Relief must be secured from laborious detailed manipulation of higher mathematics as well, if the users of it are to free their brains for something more than repetitive detailed transformations in accordance with established rules. A mathematician is not a man who can readily manipulate figures; often he cannot. He is not even a man who can readily perform the transformations of equations by the use of calculus. He is primarily an individual who is skilled in the use of symbolic logic on a high plane, and especially he is a man of intuitive judgment in the choice of the manipulative processes he employs.
All else he should be able to turn over to his mechanism, just as confidently as he turns over the propelling of his car to the intricate mechanism under the hood. Only then will mathematics be practically effective in bringing the growing knowledge of atomistics to the useful solution of the advanced problems of chemistry, metallurgy, and biology. For this reason there still come more machines to handle advanced mathematics for the scientist. Some of them will be sufficiently bizarre to suit the most fastidious connoisseur of the present artifacts of civilization.”
I love this section of the article, and agree entirely with him. Why aren’t you allowed to use a simple calculator on a standardized examination? The purpose of our technology is to assist us with simple tasks, so that we can further ourselves with more complicated ones. We can only build upon a solid foundation, and what better way to ensure that it is solid by designing a flawless machine to take care of the foundation for us?
I am less interested in the specific details of his proposed technologies, like his “hypertext” machine (the reason the article was assigned in Interface Design class in the first place), than I am in the broader concepts that he touches upon, and the timelessness of this article in general.
It seems to me that most humans think that this is it. Our evolution has brought us here, and this is the stopping point because we have evolved from monkeys and we are so advanced. Our technology is so advanced because I can carry around a device that tells me where I am on the earth, and I can video chat with my grandchild across the world. This article proves the opposite.
In 1945, the majority of the population undoubtedly felt the same way as most people do now, except they felt that they were “technologically advanced” because they could send some text across a wire in 6 hours.
What I feel is important to understand, is that we are only as advanced as the amount of time we have existed for. Of course, our technological advancements do not grow linearly with our physical evolution, but our time as Homo Sapiens is just another moment in the evolution of organic life on this planet. Much like how people think we so much more “technologically advanced” than we were in 1945, it is a popular belief that we are the most advanced species that will ever exist on this planet. Assuming that we don’t destroy the planet first, I’m sure that Homo Sapiens will evolve into something more advanced, just as our fairly primitive technology will greatly advance in the future.
This is not a new concept, I was probably first introduced to it from reading Ishmael, and I’m sure Bush understood this well. He was apparently the first presidential science advisor, and for good reason. His insight into the future of technology is so thourough that this article can literally be applicable in any time period.
I love reading stuff like that, from people who made startlingly accurate predictions.
Makes me wonder about things like The Singularity…