Andrew Ducker (andrewducker) wrote,
Andrew Ducker
andrewducker

Trying to control my impatience for a better world

I've been making an effort to not link to stories about possible technological improvement - unless it's either something which has actually been proven to work in a way that's possible to mass produce or something unusual.

Because otherwise there are weekly stories about solar cell improvements, computing improvements, battery improvements, etc. All of which tell you that they will change the world, and all of which actually turn out to need at least five years work and seventeen other problems to be fixes in order to actually be useful.

This is a good example that came up on my feeds over the weekend. Described at the top of the article as "a game changer", it sounds absolutely fascinating, and something that could significantly change energy storage and transportation. It's only when you get further down that you find the qualifiers "has the potential to..." and "While still at an early stage..."

Which isn't to entirely discount it. _Some_ early discoveries do go on to change the world, obviously, and this may well be one of them. But I strongly suspect that there are numerous barriers to production still in place, and we won't actually know for at least five years, if not much longer.



Original post on Dreamwidth - there are comment count unavailable comments there.
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

  • 20 comments