Jan

25

People have said that the reason fundamental physics has slowed down is that we have picked all the lower-hanging fruit, but that's not true. There is more lower-hanging fruit than ever before, it's just that picking it is stigmatized.

- David Deutsch

The full podcast is here.

This reminds me of what Brian Arthur insinuated in his book, The Nature of Technology. Brian Arthur describes technology as a combination of other technologies. An example is smart phone being a combination of battery technology, wireless communication technology, a microprocessor technology etc. A common statement I hear often is that we will not see much more technological progress because all the lower hanging fruit (or important things to be invented) are gone. Brian Arthur in his book asserts that if technology is a combination of other technologies, then the invention of new technology should increase the possible space of new technologies that can be invented. For example an AI breakthrough (the invention of the Transformers Model that underlies ChatGPT) will make it easier to invent new products, discover new phenomena which will also make it easier to produce even newer technology. Could this insight be a a good conjecture for always being long technology companies, since we expected technology to grow almost boundlessly if this is true?

Peter Saint-Andre comments:

Although it's seemingly true that technology always grows, that doesn't necessarily mean that technology companies are always a good investment. Various technology industries (crypto, Internet, semiconductors, chemicals, automobiles, radio, railroads, etc.) have experienced cycles of over-investment and hype. I worked in Internet tech companies from 1996 through 2022, and plenty of the companies I worked at either went bust (returning nothing to the investors or employee stockholders) or never approached their former highs (can you say Cisco?). It's not clear to me that, on balance, technology companies provide above average returns. But my perspective is qualitative, not quantitative.

Zubin Al Genubi responds:

That is the Lucretius Fallacy. Thinking the prior highest or best is the top. There will always be something new, bigger, better. That is why NQ is good over time. The old fades out and the new rises ever higher.

Asindu Drileba replies:

It is true that most tech companies actually fail without ever yielding a profit. How ever if your are diversified i.e have a very broad portfolio of investments. You don't have to be successful very many times. You can do very well with a 90% failure rate. Fred Wilson (of Union Square Ventures) claims that half of all VCs beat "The Stock Market" (I am assuming he means the S&P 500).

Big Al writes:

Important, too, to notice the improvements in ordinary things we might otherwise take for granted. A lot of this progress happens in basic materials. A quick search produces:

9 Material Discoveries that Could Transform Manufacturing

During Covid, our dishwasher broke. It was at least 35 years old and possibly older (amazing the use we got from it!). Because seemingly everybody was remodeling while they were stuck at home, it took us 3 months to get a new Bosch (during which time I washed a *lot* of dishes). But I was amazed at what an improvement the new Bosch machine was: it's so much more efficient, with energy and water, and effective, as well as quiet and very smart. That experience woke me up a bit to how much things get improved, and without any central planning authority being responsible for it.

Hernan Avella warns:

Yet, the new Bosch won't last 1/2 of the old one.


Comments

Name

Email

Website

Speak your mind

Archives

Resources & Links

Search