crazy

No wonder it took that plane 66 years to fly to the moon. It looks really slow.

And technical innovation has been stagnant ever since. Keeping most people, some of whom could be coming up with new ideas if they had time and resources to explore their passions, working dead end service jobs and exhausting themselves just to make ends meet so 12 people can have all the money is more important.

Yes I know the phone in my pocket is more powerful than the Apollo guidance computer by many orders of magnitude, but that's just iterating on an old concept. To me, innovation is jet engines for airplanes, or rockets capable of escaping earth orbit when nothing like it existed before.

What we're really fucking up is the ramp from fossil to advanced energy sources that could enable massive outward expansion into the solar system. The billionaires are forgetting that a larger piece of a smaller pie is still less pie.
mRNA vaccines. Net positive power output from fusion. Off the top of my head.
I agree with your concept of capitalism killing innovation and forcing people into dead-end jobs. But that doesn't mean technical innovation is dead. Just means it's not progressing optimally and not benefiting the right people.
- isn't that goochie goo autism old guy halting mRNA research?
In 2025, most everyone in the world can translate foreign languages at the press of a button. I dislike Gwern since he's a bigot, but I like his article, "My Ordinary Life: Improvements Since the 1990s."
- We could do that in 2010, which is about where it stagnated.

what is even the point of this graph? GDP is a nonsensical metric that barely tells anything about the economy, let alone society and technology.
- i think it's not meant too literally, more like a meme, to make fun of people who say sci-fi will forever stay sci-fi while at the same time things change very quickly.

We're still ignoring the history of all flight and rocketry prior to the invention of the heavier than air aircraft, I see.

In other news, this is what computers looked like 66 years ago. Where/when did we go astray?

I agree, I'm surprised that thing doesn't have an ashtray.
flat-screen LCD monitors were a mistake.

Amazing how photography technology improved.

And only 12 years later....

That is when we peaked as a civilisation. When MTV stopped being a music channel that's when things started to go downhill.
- Hot take: MTV peaked when they were airing animation, not music
- then The Learning Channel stopped being about learning

66 years is a long time. Considering that 1969 was 56 years ago, we still have 10 years to do something similarly worthwhile.

... 10 years is also a long time. It can wait until tomorrow.

I've had that mindset of "10 years is a long time; what's one more day" since adolescence. Boom, now it's 16 years in the future and I'm suddenly a dysfunctional adult struggling to get through each day.
But on the bright side, I just began medication for ADHD, and it's not only life changing, it's life saving. I feel capable, motivated, and determined for the first time in my life. Let's build the future so that 2035 will be a milestone for humanity!
It's just a question of priorities.
- The AI thumbnail isnt real, YouTube faked it in a cooperation effort with the US government to seem like they were winning the AI war between them and China.
Well the equivalent would be to leave the the solar system for this kind of step up. I don't see even setting foot on Mars by 2035...
- We got satellites out of our solar system.

“We dOn’t hAvE ThE ReSoUrCeS To fEeD AnD HoUsE EvErYoNe!!1”

Whitey on the Moon
A rat done bit my sister Nell.
(with Whitey on the Moon)
Her face and arms began to swell.
(and Whitey's on the Moon)
I can't pay no doctor bill.
(but Whitey's on the Moon)
Ten years from now I'll be paying still.
(while Whitey's on the Moon)
- That guy had a point. And I don't have an answer. Maybe reallocate some of the defense spending that was already insane at that time?
And the billionaire class could pay for it all without even noticing the expense; their refusal to do so is strictly due to their twisted "ethics" preventing them from "rewarding" the "lazy." 😡
This seems... unrelated?
- Disagree, we as a nation put a small percentage of our resources into space exploration just for the sake of a dick measuring contest with another nation.
  We could absolutely end poverty.
  Of course I think we could have both, but what's the point of putting a man on the moon if your citizens can't even afford access to healthcare
Right? Stop flinging nerds into space and start feeding the hungry.
- OR, how about we stop flinging nerds into space and we still don't feed the hungry?
  -Current US regime
- No we house people on the moon. If there was an actual colony on the moon I would 100% go there. Earth sucks, it's got all this pointless outside that I never use.

Pretty sure people invented flags long time ago.

/j

I wanted to show real time rendered graphics in the same interval, but there were no real time graphics in 1959.

Still, these two are 33 years apart, so we can do half.

New technologies tend to explode very quickly while there is obvious iteration and improvement from a new principle left on the table and then they settle down as the room for improvement shrinks.

fyi: you can make these show up in your comment by using
! [](imagelink)
without the space between ! and [
- My experience with how these are rendered in different apps is... inconsistent. I'm not on a Lemmy instance, so I end up going with the simplest option.
  If and when all Fedi apps do this properly... well, at that point I wouldn't have to add anything manually, would I?
Rockets are far older than airplanes and have absolutely nothing in common with each other, other than "things you do in the air". It's equivalent to taking a shit and brushing your teeth. Not connected at all.
- Except they absolutely influence each other and to pretend like there is a world where one exists without the other, especially building a spaceworthy rocket, is just wrong. Aerospace principles are highly intertwined even if the application of knowledge gained from either is applied differently.
  I would say that they’re like brushing and flossing. Very different on the face of it but the background to either is completely linked to the other. Each informs and aids the practice of the other.
- Bathroom
- You could argue that spitting out some pixels on a CRT has about as much to do with rendering millions of polygons into multiple frame buffers and collecting the whole thing into a digital image to output over HDMI.
  The OP makes a decent leap in terms of "things that move us away from the ground", I don't have a problem with it, even if there are a handful of big changes in methodology along the way.
  I mean, if we take your caveat at face value we end up with some combination of the Concorde, a F-35, the A380 and a remote controlled drone. Honestly, the point stands just as well.

What will come next in 2035? ... at the rate we're going, probably something stupid like femboy hitler

If the news in 2035 must be dominated by a hitler figure, then I will take solace that for some reason this hitler is a femboy.
- If JD wants Trump to pay attention to him, he should have stuck with the Ivanka look.
- ROFL

And you wonder why people think there was a conspiracy.

Every conspiracy theory basically starts with, "I don't trust the government, therefore..."
- Which means the first part of it is valid, it's the extrapolation that goes sideways.

Photography advanced by a lot in that time.

both of them are fake

You should not have left Reddit.
Oh yeah, they used CGI to make it look like the plane was flying.
- They towed it around with a zeppelin hidden out of frame.
Nope
- Yep

Hard to believe that man landed on the moon only 60+ years after landing on Earth. Makes you wonder what's next

Landing on the moon again. It's been over fifty years since we've been back.
- Well there is the Artemis program although it seems massively overly complicated.
  SLS is basically just the Apollo rocket again, except without a lander. Then they're going to dock with a space station that they haven't built, and transfer via the space station onto a lander produce by SpaceX (although possibly there will be others), then land on the moon in the lander;and construct a permanent habitat on the moon. Presumably the space station will do something other than serve as a transfer system but I don't really know what.
  With the trump administration though it's anyone's guess what happens I'm assuming that they'll probably cut funding so it won't happen anyway.
- Or perhaps another earth landing
Hmm, how about AI powered facism?

These are two different tech trees. Rockets had 1000+ years of development to get to this point while aeroplanes had ~30. I hate that this bullshit gets repeated. They are not equivalent in any way.

Came to say this. The Apollo missions are forks of ICBMs.
We should instead show a picture of Robert Goddard next to his 1926 LO2-fuel rocket and then man on the moon and say "These two images are only 43 years apart." It's objectively more impressive because within an average lifetime at any point in history, we went from rockets as fireworks and weapons to landing on the moon. But it also requires people to know who Robert Goddard is and what he invented.
- I'm hoping this future post of yours makes it to the front page so many can learn.
It is a bit different sending a paper rocket into the air and successfully bringing people to the moon.
I don't think anyone is arguing that rockets started development 66 years before humans reaching the moon. It is just that it is a rapid development from barely being possible for humans to fly to suddenly (66 years later) bouncing around on the moon.
Pretty sure flight and orbital mechanics have some overlap.