[nod]

1. You are being rude. Don't write anything that you wouldn't say to someone's face.

2. I believe you completely misread the parent's point: that there are only a few technologies that are 100 years old. (Not sure what that means with regards to the 'transformative' argument, but still...)

[dxbydt]

Thanks. The "only 3 innovations have lasted over 100 years" premise isn't original. I first heard it at a graduation ceremony and it made a lasting impact on me. Ofcourse the speaker was very charismatic & way more dramatic than I am :)

But the phrase keeps popping up in several places. For instance, in Hedgehogging, Barton Biggs goes to a pre-2000 tech conference where they famously declare that technology innovations will propel the Dow to 20,000 in 1 year! Biggs calls bullshit & points out that genuine innovation like Air Conditioning & steam engines are once-in-a-lifetime event. He is asked if the internet is a "fundamental" innovation & he disagrees. He becomes a laughing stock. The next year the Dow drops 2000 points.

[shadowsun7]

It pops up in Nicholas Nassem Taleb's works, too: "the technologies that run the world today (like the Internet, the computer and the laser) are not used in the way intended by those who invented them", and: "the three most significant inventions of the past 100 years (...)"

[thorwed123]

1. changed 2. read his argument again, he implies that someone from 100 years ago, would hardly find anything different