Tim Harford: what we get wrong about technology

Please use the sharing tools found via the email

icon at the top of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email licensing@ft.com to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found here.
https://www.ft.com/content/32c31874-610b-11e7-8814-0ac7eb84e5f1

So sophisticated is Rachael that she is impossible to distinguish from a human without specialised equipment; she even believes herself to be human. Los Angeles police detective Rick Deckard knows otherwise; in Rachael, Deckard is faced with an artificial intelligence so beguiling, he finds himself falling in love. Yet when he wants to invite Rachael out for a drink, what does he do? He calls her up from a payphone. There is something revealing about the contrast between the two technologies — the biotech miracle that is Rachael, and the graffiti-scrawled videophone that Deckard uses to talk to her. It’s not simply that Blade Runner fumbled its futurism by failing to anticipate the smartphone. That’s a forgivable slip, and Blade Runner is hardly the only film to make it. It’s that, when asked to think about how new inventions might shape the future, our imaginations tend to leap to technologies that are sophisticated beyond comprehension.




https://www.ft.com/content/32c31874-610b-11e7-8814-0ac7eb84e5f1

Popular posts from this blog

KHUSTAI NATIONAL PARK

Эрэгтэй хүмүүсийг хамгийн ихээр бухимдуулдаг Бүсгүйчүүдийн гаргадаг тэнэг үйлдлүүд.