Jason Pontin: Can technology solve our big problems?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 3 жов 2013
- In 1969, Buzz Aldrin's historical step onto the moon leapt mankind into an era of technological possibility. The awesome power of technology was to be used to solve all of our big problems. Fast forward to present day, and what's happened? Are mobile apps all we have to show for ourselves? Journalist Jason Pontin looks closely at the challenges we face to using technology effectively ... for problems that really matter.
TEDTalks is a daily video podcast of the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes (or less). Look for talks on Technology, Entertainment and Design -- plus science, business, global issues, the arts and much more.
Find closed captions and translated subtitles in many languages at www.ted.com/translate
Follow TED news on Twitter: / tednews
Like TED on Facebook: / ted
Subscribe to our channel: / tedtalksdirector - Наука та технологія
most of the problems can be solved using technology if there is concerted effort from all the stake holders! Alleviating hunger is not an issue if all mind
This is the voice we need for the world. Western people should be glad that people still can post video and have the lecture like this.
The big idea worth spreading (such as it is) is that we can solve big problems with technology. In fact, we must. But big problems are hard.
To solve a big problem through technology requires, minimally, four things: 1). We must make a political decision to solve the problem; 2). Our institutions must fully support that decision; 3). The problem must really be technological; 4). We must understand the problem.
One of the best ted talks I`ve seen..
You state a truth so self evident seen by so few from the time of THE CRUSADES and long before. We do so well spending money , motivation, and initiative to cause and create death and so little to share things of life and things needed for living throughout the world.
Your statement
" What might we have achieved if we could marshal that sort of effort for advancing the human condition? "
is so very true and profound !
probably the best TED talk iv ever seen
Interesting talk, it is true there are many hard problems to solve. I think energy storage and transportation is one of the biggest scientific problems we have at the moment. Battery tech has gotten better but unlike other areas of technology that are growing exponentially energy storage solutions are still growing at a snails pace. There are many places (deserts, ocean tides, etc) that can generate large amounts of natural energy if only we could store it efficiently and move it without loss.
Yes, that's what I'm saying.
The big idea worth spreading is that we can solve big problems with technology. In fact, we must. But big problems are hard.
To solve a big problem through technology requires, minimally, four things: 1). We must make a popular political decision to solve the problem; 2). Our institutions must fully support that decision; 3). The problem must really be technological; 4). We must understand the problem.
This talk really reflects the situation quite well. In the states if you look at the number of people getting physics degrees it pretty much coincides with the problem's he's outlined.
I agree with him. humanity has reached the limit of what can be accomplished with government. It is time to seriously examine how to eliminate the institution of coercion so that people can live in peace instead of war.
You'd better hope it can solve our problems. Because there sure as hell isn't anything else that can
And what is wrong with taking incremental steps towards a goal? For whether you climb stairs one or two at a time, you will spend just as long climbing them.
All these things he mentions as being not as good as Mars colonies: cell phones, the internet, Facebook, etc. are far more valuable to most people's real lives than having a few dozen people doing science on Mars rather than on Earth. It may not have the glamour or the drama of a Mars colony, but as far as enriching human life goes, I know which one I'd pick. And I *love* astronomy.
Correct me if I'm wrong. So basically he is saying that even if you have the resources (technologies), if you don't know how to manage it (political involvement), you can't even solve a problem (like in the famine situation).
Great talk!
The point is that many people don't realize the obvious importance of a right focus for technological development.
Lately, I am also been thinking... What are my works for? Why I am so much passionate about technology that won't even solve my own problem? Why we are solving big organization problems ignoring major problems like war, education, poverty, health and much more.
زۆر ڕاستەکەی ، مرۆڤەکان لەجیاتی ئەوەی بیر لە پێشکەوتنی مرۆڤایەتی بکەنەوە بیر لە لە پێگەی ولاتەکانیان دەکەنەوە ، بەلام ئیلۆن مەسک پێچەوانەی کەسانی ترە ، ئەو و ستیڤن هاوکینگ تاکە کەس بوون بیر لە هەموو مرۆۆڤایەتی دەکەنەوە نەک ولاتەکانیان
Great, congrats!
Such an idea existed and I just know this ? Is this my fault ?
Thank you old man Jason !
Patience good sir. Patience. We've only just begun to reach the explosion point on the exponential curve of technological improvement.
I want to say congratulations to Jason Pontin for finally going through puberty. Better late than ever!
it doesnt matter what they say when theyll have it. each time more information is researched and the propability that itll be done soon gets higher and higher obviously
Do you mean the capacity (what can be provided by existing facilities) or the potential (what could be provided by existing & additional facilities)?
And what would that be, in your mind? If you could design a more sustainable system, how would it work?
Wow!
You're right. The rocket which sent the Apollo crews to the Moon was designed by former Nazi engineers whom the US government helped escape the Nuremberg Trials through Operation Paperclip. The first head of NASA's largest center (MSFC) was a former SS officer, Wernher von Braun.
main theme: take risk, think big, embrace hard.. however, it could be narrated much better with more awakening stories such as what the new big challenges would awaken for the humanity
is alleviating hunger an issue if there is a concerted effort?
Absolutely agree with him 😮
Love the user name btw!
Agreed.
Going to the moon was a technological race. That was the use. The fact that we, you know, learned stuff, is icing on the cake.
Why dont we have plasma rifles yet? I want a rifle that can one shot a tank goddammit!
That's not how guns work
I agree
I think his point was that the political situation is different now, he was not trying to say that we need competition. In fact, if anything, he argues for the same thing as you: cooperation.
Also you can tinker with the absorption coefficient such as using black materials and no reflective coating, therefore keeping the local heat constant, while transferring the 'extra' absorbed energy through power lines.
Our planet has coped with regional temperature changes by adjusting the surrounding water currents, while essentially covering the planet with a blanket (CO2) and adding an electric blanket (burning fuels) will prove much more problematic.
Science can solve our big problems. TED should focus on these issues.
Technology is a tool to be used to solve our problems, and the reason why we mostly fail to use technology for solving our issues is that we just know the problem but never understands them. And the people who knows much about technology is using it for their own purposes ,which seems to be the worst of all.
I took it as a debunk of the idea that technological change is slowing down.
Technological change is chugging along as fast as it always has, or faster. The reason that life for most hasn't changed much in the last 30 years is because of the socioeconomic structure of our society.
Going to the moon WAS solving a problem. It may not have needed to be solved, but it was one HELL of a big problem.
That's why I mentioned changing the name of Africa to McGoogle. That would be the biggest marketing move that the world has ever seen and ensure global recognition of those companies for many centuries to come.
only that apollo program was not a peace time mobilization
I see your argument, but the same thing is happening with burning fuels, huge concentration of heat at the power plants + the heat when the energy is being used in appliances.
So essentially burning fuels is create more heat increasing the overall temperature of the planet, while solar transfers the heat from one region to another like the ocean currents are doing, basically we've created a 'current' without water.
Which would you say is better?
Yep
He says that in the video besides the actual cost.
There is more to say about this, of course, but I could not agree with you more.
"New Wind Energy Resource Potential
Estimates for the United States" (2011) by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory of the Department of Energy shows:
The US has the (conservative) potential for 10,459 GW of onshore wind power, or an annual generation of 37 petawatt-hours, which is nine times larger than current total U.S. electricity consumption. There's also 4,150 GW of offshore capacity.
As for solar energy, the Earth annually receives 274,000,000 GW from the Sun.
You forgot to add they can make perspiration sensors right now, along with 32 other things, but why put it all in one when you can space it out evenly for $200+
Did anybody notice the screen at 8:33 ?O_O!
But we can still go to space right? I mean that would be awesome and a new space race will drive innovation so I think space and his main point do go well together.
Yes, we don't have to hunt with our bare hands anymore and keep watch all day for predators, we have become quite a lazy species :D. As for children having less social interaction being a problem you're completely right. My concern is with homeschooled children and how they could get a proper amount of social interaction at a young age without having to attend a very inefficient education facility. Maybe an education system based on group projects and teamwork, not writing what the teacher says.
The Zeitgeist Movement and The Venus Project!
Science and technology for human and ecological balance and sustainability :)
One day we'll all solve these problems, and new ones will rise... When we venture to the stars.
the moon landings program....the best comedy you can find anywhere.
great talk dude, assuming that's not a fake acc.
It does seem self evident doesn't it? But I guess primal urges are still too strong in many people. It seems to me that the best thing we could do for our economy, national security, and world peace would be to do a "Manhattan Project" devoted to developing clean, renewable, cheap energy sources for the world, but instead we spend more on our military than the next 20 some countries combined.
So many people are hooked on talking about space travel. That wasn't his point. His point was we could be better/completely solving the biggest problems mankind faces but commercialisation & politics run above & halt getting the solutions out there. It's sad but true that although we grew on this planet at no cost & no ruling now everything comes at a price or under law & slows the chance of a better future for us all
Jacque Fresco and The Venus Project are 40 years ahead on this topic.
Nuclear energy is basically an advanced method of boiling water just as burning fuels, the difference is the waste created. Boiling huge pots of water around the northern states will release more heat to the atmosphere overall than redistribution of the sun's energy.
Also I repeat, changing the reflection coefficient on the panels solves the less heat in the equator problem!
What i mentioned are long term goals and of course i don't expect them to become reality in a blink of an eye. But lets put some numbers into perspective. US 2011 military budget: $680 billion, entire Apollo programme budget (1959-1973 including 6 landings) $109 billion in 2010 dollars. War on drugs this year already caused costs of around $30 billion. I have no idea how much it would cost to get to Mars but based on how US spends it's money it seems like a legit investment already.
Nothing can help us except for us.
6:25 watch that guy's eyes roll lol.
i don't want to start an argument and I am certainly not anti science or ethically opposed to genetic engineering, but genetic engineering has done nothing to solve famine. If anything it has done the opposite. More calories can be produced per acre using ecological farming methods than any other system. And remember we don't have a food problem (there is plenty of food for everyone in the world), we have a distribution problem, which GE does nothing to solve.
No. As I say, "Landing on the moon occurred in the context of a long series of technological triumphs. The first half of the 20th century produced the assembly line and the aeroplane, penicillin and a vaccine for tuberculosis. In the middle years of the century, polio was eradicated and smallpox eliminated. During most of history, human beings could go no faster than a horse or a boat with a sail; but by 1969, the crew of Apollo 10 had flown at 25,000 miles an hour."
writing with legs is hard and we dont to it...
just that i have to say to 2:23
It's not the politicians, it's more the military, corporations and the bureaucrats.
May I ask how does solar power affect climate?
CO2 basically acting as a blanket over the planet, trapping heat within the atmosphere.
From my understanding, currently radiant energy from the rays of the sun hits the ground, some of it is absorbed and some reflected. This heat then 'transfers' the thermal energy into the atmosphere by conduction and convection.
Panels is essentially building a platform over the ground which does more or less the same thing with the right reflective coat.
I cannot find a list of the state-by-state *potentials* of solar energy. What I have are lists of the state-by-state *capacities* of the installed solar power modules/plants.
Since cross-state transmission of the power is possible, the "state-by-state" potentials aren't that much relevant here. Even less so when the collectively harnessable solar energy is so immensely abundant as to offset the extra energy cost for the long-distance transmissions.
You promised me Mars colonies.
Instead, I got Facebook.
This pretty much sums our feelings. Right now, if it wasn't for the military (and the odd billionaire) pushing big concepts, all we'd have to look forward to in our lifetimes would be minor advancements in consumer technology. Iphone 38, now with perspiration sensors!
Conservation of energy, we are not releasing heat into the atmosphere more that we otherwise would have if we get the absorption and reflection coefficient right. The planet will adjust by changing ocean currents as it as done.
I cannot comment on the feasibility in the large scale, that I personally believe is a economic problem. But from my point of view the only not 'clean' aspect is in the production of solar panels.
I think like to him, it's not neccessary come again to Luna. That opportunity, it was start for the technology development but, to the real problems of our planet. Nothing would have happend in terms of techonlogy development if the human didn't go to the moon
peace time?
It seems that the problem is that our gov't funding, at least in the US has followed one generation: baby boomers. When this population boom was young and needed jobs we had massive public projects like the Apollo program, when they were the experienced workers we had massive tax cuts, and now that they're retiring we're getting a large focus on healthcare and retirement benefits. In order to get our politicians to invest in these large projects again, we need to have a young population again.
That is a problem, it's true. My feet are big. Also, grotesquely arched.
Right, and I said only 0.07% is enough to meet the global energy demand. (And I'm not saying we should rely solely on the solar energy.)
You can't get around creating heat with energy consumption, solar is as clean as you will get in the operational phase.
Nuclear is great until you have accidents, contaminated water in Japan is a huge problem, even if you build it in the ocean, you will get fish and currents carry radioactive material to shore.
What I meant was that the recreational technology is what's ruining society and children. We keep believing that were not animals, and so we do all these unnatural things throughout the day. Honestly, I would have loved to live in the 1930's where there wasn't really any recreational technology, but only had USEFUL technology. And even guns ruined how war should be, no one fights face to face anymore, which is why we have very few men now a day's without any courage or discipline
Saw that. Zeitgest movies tend to over exaggerate some points.
Nice list man, but sorry have to disagree with the fusion and commercial asteroid mining. Its unsure if the fusion challenges can be overcome in that time frame, the Americans said they would have had the fusion problem sorted by the 80's. Its always 10 to 30 years away. As for mining man, only Elon Musk would be the best bet, as the other three agencies are seriously lagging.
Someone needs to tell this guy about spaceX
There is so much truth in this talk!
The truth is, we need another moon landing. An accomplishment that will put a bright spark of inspiration in the eyes of all humans. I believe this accomplishment might be Kickstarter. Or rather what will be accomplished with Kickstarter. Kickstarter will probably just grow and grow with every new realized Kickstarter campaign, and one day become a major crowdfunding movement of unimaginable proportions.
Great end
So if going to the moon wasn't such a big deal after all, then can't we just conclude that we are as good today in solving big problems as we were ever before?
We already can fix our big problems, if not for our single biggest issue, the complete and total failure to do what is necessary for political and financial concerns. We're our own biggest problem and we don't have a technology yet to fix that.
Instead of the dark cold and lonely cosmos/space, people prefer to "travel" through cyberspace. It's cheaper, safer, and much more entertaining.
is it possible to provide the whole world with solar panels and wind energy?
Why have we taken a path away from our earth? Greed and more like power, I believe!...much like we all lost a simple thing as otr television which was perfectly fine, but through military greed, we all must lose and pay.
While renewable Energy may become true, a treatment for cancer in general is rather unlikely.
Cancer isn't a specific disease but simply a random "accident" in a cell of the respective tissue.
We may be able to reduce the risk, treat specific variants etc.. But I seriously doubt we will soon be able to "treat" it like an "ordinary" disease, caused by a specific pathogen.
Jacque Fresco
(just putting the name out there)
0:12 .... you're welcome
I did, it's pretty fluffy. I mean eventually, there's going to be organizations that resemble the government, the military and some sort of commerce.
what if the we had a president that was an engineer and not one that went to law school or business school?
Just as bad...
I've already said that in the long run the benefits from having a Mars colony can be enormous and obviously there is risk involved. Sounds like any other big investment to me. I don't know the specifics, we haven't even surveyed the planet properly! It seems that people nowdays are incapable of considering any investment that doesn't bring immediate results and yet they have no problem with throwing billions at immediate solutions that bring no results.
Why is not having mars colonies a big problem? There are much bigger problem like social inequalities, inhumane intensive mass animal farming, wars, child labour or climate change. Not having visisted mars intensively yet isn´t a very fitting example.
+Myren Eario Because none of those issues will matter the slightest if everything is dead on Earth from an asteroid impact. Visiting Mars isn't just for lols, the the colonisation of Mars isn't science fiction, but the closest thing we have to a backup plan. If human is a species that exist on a self sustaining manner on more than just one planet, its chance to exist on the long term will be much greater. The problems you mention, in comparison, would be tiny when viewed from the lens of the specie's history. There's no reason why some resources shouldn't be allocated to work towards space exploration and transport, while also working on other issues on Earth.
No vision, lame comment
I've reviewed this talk on TEDsummaries dotcom
True but there are at least scientists working on new methods into looking further into space and extending our knowledge about the universe. & NASA are working on stationing themselves on the moon in future. That's interesting enough for now. I'd like to see a 'race' for which countries can discover better medical advances and make a big impact in its use of green energy etc.
me either.
Atmospheric CO2 levels have increased by 30% or so since the industrial revolution. That's not a few percent of the natural level. Same with nitrous oxide and methane - levels increased in a steep curve. That's not evidence for human influence, but looks kinda right.
But maybe technology will help us provide cheap, accessible, high quality education , which will make the next generations more aware of the real problems and more willing and more able to solve them.