/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.11599739]

>scientific progress isn't slowing down! the improvements we've made in machine learning alone dwarf improvements made in the past

[Anonymous No.11599825]

>>11599739
Machine learning has been done and finished since the 1970s. It was work that the military conducted secretly and only declassified in the last five years or so.

[Anonymous No.11600700]

>>11599739
It's so pathetic how much people lower the bar now.

[Anonymous No.11600706]

>>11599739
That is true, so I don't really understand the point of your:
>muh irony, lel
More papers are published now than ever before, even during the supposed height of discovery back in the 1800s and 1900s.

[Anonymous No.11600740]

>>11600706
>using raw number of papers published as measurement of scientific progress

..................

[Anonymous No.11600746]

Just think, in 50 years we'll have flying cars!

[Anonymous No.11600750]

>>11600740
Then go look at the h-index, you no-science newfag.

[Anonymous No.11600755]

>>11600740
>>11600750
Look, I'm so kind, I even did it for you:
>https://www.scimagojr.com/countryrank.php?order=h&ord=desc
Top ranked countries in term of h-index:
>10701848 citable documents for US
>2935537 citable documents for UK
>2787096 citable documents for Germany
Et cetera.

[Anonymous No.11600765]

>>11600755
>Look,

[Anonymous No.11600774]

>>11600765
That's not an argument, you post-2015 newfag plebbitor piece of shit. You are not worthy of this once hallowed board, leave now.

[Anonymous No.11600782]

>>11600706
More papers, less progress. This is evidence of a bloated class of academics who aren't very productive in terms of units of useful invention per hour worked or paper published.

[Anonymous No.11600788]

>>11600706
>>11600755
Papers on what, though?
The barrier for entry has dropped so much that a higher proportion of papers are on such overly specific nonsense, like "a study on the changes in wing patterns of this subspecies of a particular moth if you alter its diet in this particular way".
Furthermore, it's needless to say that the publish or perish culture has gotten way out of hand, and on top of the ridiculous pressure on academics to publish positive results, a lot of papers are just bullshit.
Granted, these two arguments are mostly geared at biology and psychology, but I think the general pattern can be seen everywhere (besides CS I suppose, I'm not really sure).

[Anonymous No.11600790]

>>11600774

[Anonymous No.11600797]

>>11600782
Is it really a problem of growing inefficiency? Or is it just that we have more advanced topics, with more branching complexity?

Like, the universe is no more complicated than in Newton or Leeuwenhoek's time but any direction you look we're now a couple generations of Nobel prizes away from their sort of initial field-creating work.

[Anonymous No.11600798]

>>11600782
>>11600788
Wrong, it has nothing to do with the academic apparatus. The dissonance is between available technology, which is considerably further along in terms of development than industrial-consumer technology. The gap is in terms of need. Because our current industrial-consumer technology is fit for purpose, there is no to little market demand for radically different solutions, especially to non-novel problems.
We're essentially in a modern:
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-level_equilibrium_trap

>>11600790
Well, /b/ might've died by the cancer killing it, but you're the new cancer killing 4chan as a whole.

[Anonymous No.11600802]

>>11600798
>Well, /b/ might've died by the cancer killing it, but you're the new cancer killing 4chan as a whole.

[Anonymous No.11600806]

>>11600802
What even is your point at this point, /pol/tard? Have you run out of infomemes to "redpill the normies", isn't Q-anon dropping any more redpills for you to disseminate like the mindless sheeple you are? Sad.

[Anonymous No.11600813]

>>11600806

[Anonymous No.11600816]

>>11600813
>Ugh, I hate how lefties never want to hear other peoples opinions, they just ignore them or shut them down.
Ten minutes later:
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE! SHILL, SHILL! SHAREBLUE, SHILL! REEEEEEEEEEE!
You and your ilk have the self-awareness of a turnip.

[Anonymous No.11600823]

>>11600816

[Anonymous No.11600826]

>>11600823
P U R I T Y C H E C K

[Anonymous No.11600832]

>>11600798
That's a really good point, and really fits in well with how WW2 and the cold war saw such rapid progress. Thanks, anon,

[Anonymous No.11600833]

>>11600826
Just ignore him. Replying will only encourage the stupidity.

[Anonymous No.11600839]

>>11600832
It's like financial institutions and big business still using COBOL, despite it being decades out of date and better solutions existing for decades as well. It is the epitome of the philosophy of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" - even when it is on the verge of "breaking".

[Anonymous No.11600842]

>>11600832
>>11600839
As an afterthought, what we really need is an event that sparks demand for novel solutions. Seems SARS-CoV-2 wasn't enough for that, although, I may be speaking prematurely.

[Anonymous No.11600844]

>>11600839
To be fair, businesses do have a middle ground they need to tread carefully. Education is a perfect example of going to far in the opposite direction, where they continually want to add and update technology, wasting their budget on a system that is still manages to be less efficient than pen/paper and chalk/blackboard.

[Anonymous No.11600856]

>>11600842
Musk seems to be trying to go forth without that spark, and isn't doing too bad. In my opinion, if the military became less controlled by weapons manufacturers, and more into research like it once was, it could inorganically provide that spark.

[Anonymous No.11600864]

>>11600844
Certainly, my college will buy a whole new computer sweet and then a couple of years, at most, will be replacing all of the hardware. It's the whole thing of finding the golden mean. Currently academia, or education, is decadent in its technological consumerism. Whereas, the industrial-consumer sphere is too austere, or complacent.

[Anonymous No.11600874]

>>11600856
DARPA needs to be unchained. They research plenty, but little of it makes it into applications, because the brass don't see the necessity. Which is why, we end up losing so much IP to China, because they're willing to invest in things like cyber warfare.

[Anonymous No.11600877]

>>11599739
Kinda crazy how everytime there's a breakthrough in AI pop-sci freaks out and claims the singularity is upon us, then there's no progress in the field for 10+ years.

[Anonymous No.11600884]

>>11600877
That's because ML and hardware have either reached, or nearly reached their limits. We need QC, or some other novel computation solution, to move past the barriers we are currently facing.

[Anonymous No.11600911]

>>11600826
>>11600833

[Anonymous No.11601044]

>>11600877
>AI pop-sci freaks out and claims the singularity is upon us
agree
>then there's no progress in the field for 10+ years.
but you're a faggot
nice dubs though

[Anonymous No.11601615]

>>11599739

>my life sucks so much if humanity doesn't create AI waifus, immortality, happiness generator brain module, FTL space travel in the next 50 years I'll die as a miserable old man

stop crying you little pussy bitch and stop relying on some utopia being created for you improve your life yourself