links for 2011-02-04

| | TrackBacks (0)
  • This is sort of a frustrating summation:

    "But those who do concern themselves with the formal regulation of "technology" might wish to worry less about possible negative effects of innovation and more about the damage being done to our environment and our prosperity by the mid-20th-century technologies that no sane and responsible person would propose today, but in which we remain trapped by mysterious and ineffable forces."

    Stephenson gets there after listing all the very concrete reasons why we might be stuck with non-optimal solutions -- and they are not mysterious and ineffable forces at all. There's nothing mysterious and ineffable about federal regulations, after all. Ending the article on the "mysterious and ineffable" tip is possibly meant to be sarcastic, but it's neither accurate nor helpful in understanding the situation. Better to ask why and how path dependency and lock-in (Stephenson's preferred culprits) came to be.

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: links for 2011-02-04.

TrackBack URL for this entry:

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Liz published on February 4, 2011 3:04 PM.

links for 2011-01-18 was the previous entry in this blog.

links for 2011-02-12 is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.


  • /thinking
  • projects
Creative Commons License
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.