Things that technology should have solved by now

[6a]

Returning to things I would have thought technology would solve, how about weeds in the flower bed. None of the various products you can buy at the garden center seem to do the job of keeping it weed-free and eventually you wind up having to pull some out by hand.

Black plastic.  Cut contractor bags into sheets, and overlap them with holes only where you intend to plant.  Beyond this, expecting technology to allow you to dictate which plants grow and which do not is a little unrealistic, even if you resort to dumping chemicals in the soil.

Another: Some kind of metal that would be impervious to rust and wear, such as that caused by winter road treatments, thereby eliminating the need to use an undercarriage wash if your car-washing hose is inadequate to do a thorough job and you don't have the ability to put the car up on ramps (our driveway is sloped–not much, but enough to make ramps impractical).

Interesting–most folks I know in climates that necessitate salt shut off and drain the hose for the winter.

I have a hose bibb in the garage, but I definitely shut off the one outside in winter.

[Scott5114]

Politics aside, I definitely agree that communication in general has been more hindered that aided by technology. Just look at any Facebook or YouTube comments thread.


iPhone

Maybe not originally, but when people started to type (mostly typing on the Internet and texting) as a replacement for talking, that's when it got worse.

No it didn't. The Internet simply allows you to expose yourself to a wider spectrum of idiocy than you would have run into otherwise.

[tribar]

Weight loss is another one.  You gain weight because you're body holds onto fat (or something like that).  Invent something that prevents that from happening. 

Obviously you can just eat healthier.  But it would be nice to splurge and not have to worry about gaining weight. 

[Pete from Boston]

Weight loss is another one.  You gain weight because you're body holds onto fat (or something like that).  Invent something that prevents that from happening. 

Obviously you can just eat healthier.  But it would be nice to splurge and not have to worry about gaining weight.

Yes, technology replacing the need for personal responsibility would be great.  The above comments about the internet, however, detail the fact that this isn't yet the case even though people think it is.

[NE2]

Weight loss is another one.  You gain weight because you're body holds onto fat (or something like that).  Invent something that prevents that from happening.

[The Nature Boy]

Didn't we learn from Wall-E that technology will just make us all morbidly obese because it'll eliminate our need to actually do anything?

[formulanone]

Dishwashers that actually clean glasses, dishes, utensils, and cups...allowing you to bypass the pre-wash chore altogether.

Stupidity.
I thought having access to nearly all of the world's information was going to make everyone smarter, but results have been tepid.
Turns out, some people use this information portal to make themselves stupider.  Rather than finding objective reality, they seek out anything that will reinforce their established biases, thus making them not only stupider, but louder about their stupidity.  And honestly, it can be hard to not do.  Especially if one is not aware of their biases.

I think there's plenty to be learned, but if most of the time spent on the Internet is used for idle chit-chat, there's less gained other than the awesome ability to converse with folks around the world (or down the block). Plus, groups usually tend to get annoyed by the know-it-all rather than the anti-intellectuals, unless an open question is asked. 

On the other hand, I think people's expectations are totally out of whack: that we should "know everything" or never make mistakes again due to magic portable web devices...well, public use of the Internet is still in its teenage years. We jump on petty errors like it's a beloved animal that suddenly went rouge and killed grandma.

[empirestate]

Dishwashers that actually clean glasses, dishes, utensils, and cups...allowing you to bypass the pre-wash chore altogether.

Stupidity.
I thought having access to nearly all of the world's information was going to make everyone smarter, but results have been tepid.
Turns out, some people use this information portal to make themselves stupider.  Rather than finding objective reality, they seek out anything that will reinforce their established biases, thus making them not only stupider, but louder about their stupidity.  And honestly, it can be hard to not do.  Especially if one is not aware of their biases.

I think there's plenty to be learned, but if most of the time spent on the Internet is used for idle chit-chat, there's less gained other than the awesome ability to converse with folks around the world (or down the block). Plus, groups usually tend to get annoyed by the know-it-all rather than the anti-intellectuals, unless an open question is asked. 

On the other hand, I think people's expectations are totally out of whack: that we should "know everything" or never make mistakes again due to magic portable web devices...well, public use of the Internet is still in its teenage years. We jump on petty errors like it's a beloved animal that suddenly went rouge and killed grandma.

What mostly strikes me, and this is in real life as well as online, is that with all the information available, people don't actually observe it, digest it, consider it, and act according to it. People don't make decisions based on the information in front of them, and don't become better informed by it. We've all seen examples of this online, of course, but it happens in real life too, like people crossing the street who haven't yet looked at the information of whether vehicles are about to run them over, or merging into a lane without using the information of whether there's a car in it.

[bugo]

Whereas 50 years ago, we all got our news from ABC, CBS and NBC only, today any wacko can get their news from whatever news source validates their beliefs. The fact that we only had three news sources seemed to have a moderating effect on our country because you couldn't just get your news filtered by whatever ideological prism that you prefer to see through.

Actually, those three networks all filtered the news by the same ideological prism (they still do today) and until the 1980s, there really weren't any broadcast alternatives.

LOL @ Hep B and the "liberal media".

[bugo]

I tend to think of the internet like a giant buffet. If I took you to an all you can eat, you'd probably still only eat the foods that you like and would probably only sample the things that you're unclear on. The vast availability of something doesn't change consumption habits, it just leads you to seek out more things that confirm what you already believe or know you like.

The internet also allows people with fringe beliefs to seek out others with those same fringe beliefs. Whereas 50 years ago, we all got our news from ABC, CBS and NBC only, today any wacko can get their news from whatever news source validates their beliefs. The fact that we only had three news sources seemed to have a moderating effect on our country because you couldn't just get your news filtered by whatever ideological prism that you prefer to see through.

That is maybe why we have so many taking sides nowadays.  At one time we all did not use the term conservative or liberal at all.  We loved or hated a president, governor, senator, etc. by the person and not so much by the party.

Now its the party or the stereotypes we make as parties what we judge by not the person.  All because the number of endless outlets we take sides as each different outlet pushes their personal views on us.  For example Fox, which should not be called Fox News at all,  because they do not report the news like traditional journalists do, but give out commentary to the viewers and get them to join the bandwagon that they are on.  Sean Hanity for one, only reports news that exposes his own political views and not events that are for public knowledge is the perfect example.  Though I respect his right to free speech and commentary, still you cannot say he is a true news reporter.

Other outlets whether on cable, internet, or some other new means is always reporting with bias using the politically correct term to describe them and getting the public all wild up about their convictions which end up either being conservative, moderate, tea party, progressive or whatever.

None of this is even remotely true. Partisanism has been going on since before the country even existed.

[Pete from Boston]

The prism the major news outlets filter through is that of whatever profits the shareholders of their multinational corporation parents.  Hardly new.

[Brandon]

I tend to think of the internet like a giant buffet. If I took you to an all you can eat, you'd probably still only eat the foods that you like and would probably only sample the things that you're unclear on. The vast availability of something doesn't change consumption habits, it just leads you to seek out more things that confirm what you already believe or know you like.

The internet also allows people with fringe beliefs to seek out others with those same fringe beliefs. Whereas 50 years ago, we all got our news from ABC, CBS and NBC only, today any wacko can get their news from whatever news source validates their beliefs. The fact that we only had three news sources seemed to have a moderating effect on our country because you couldn't just get your news filtered by whatever ideological prism that you prefer to see through.

That is maybe why we have so many taking sides nowadays.  At one time we all did not use the term conservative or liberal at all.  We loved or hated a president, governor, senator, etc. by the person and not so much by the party.

Now its the party or the stereotypes we make as parties what we judge by not the person.  All because the number of endless outlets we take sides as each different outlet pushes their personal views on us.  For example Fox, which should not be called Fox News at all,  because they do not report the news like traditional journalists do, but give out commentary to the viewers and get them to join the bandwagon that they are on.  Sean Hanity for one, only reports news that exposes his own political views and not events that are for public knowledge is the perfect example.  Though I respect his right to free speech and commentary, still you cannot say he is a true news reporter.

Other outlets whether on cable, internet, or some other new means is always reporting with bias using the politically correct term to describe them and getting the public all wild up about their convictions which end up either being conservative, moderate, tea party, progressive or whatever.

None of this is even remotely true. Partisanism has been going on since before the country even existed.

Yeah, ever see the attacks in the various newspapers against John Adams, or Thomas Jefferson?  They can make today's partisanship look downright quaint.

[Brandon]

The prism the major news outlets filter through is that of whatever profits the shareholders of their multinational corporation parents.  Hardly new.

Or whatever the owner or lead editor deem it should be.

[Brandon]

Weight loss is another one.  You gain weight because you're body holds onto fat (or something like that).  Invent something that prevents that from happening.

I'm not so sure I'd want to use anything from Adipose Industries.

[J N Winkler]

Dishwashers that actually clean glasses, dishes, utensils, and cups...allowing you to bypass the pre-wash chore altogether.

Consumer Reports claims that they exist.  We did purchase a new dishwasher in 2011 and we have noticed that cleaning performance has decreased more or less monotonically since then, except for brief periods of recovery after running an empty cycle with a descaling agent.

I suspect dishwashers do in fact require some routine maintenance to maintain as-new performance, but the manufacturers do not tell consumers about it so that they can claim to sell a completely maintenance-free product, and the necessary work goes beyond empty cycles with a descaling agent.

It is similar to what has been happening with automatic transmissions in passenger cars for at least the last 30 years.  The automakers like to pretend that sheardown doesn't occur to the factory fill so that they can sell the cars as requiring only oil changes up to some very high mileage value that, in the majority of cases, is not seen by the first owner.  Meanwhile, an owner planning to hold the car for the long term usually comes out ahead if he or she changes the fluid every 30,000 miles or (if the transmission is equipped with an easily replaced external filter) uses a full-synthetic fluid known for shear stability as lifetime fill.

[vdeane]

Weight loss is another one.  You gain weight because you're body holds onto fat (or something like that).  Invent something that prevents that from happening.

I'm not so sure I'd want to use anything from Adipose Industries.

But the fat just walks away!

[Brandon]

Weight loss is another one.  You gain weight because you're body holds onto fat (or something like that).  Invent something that prevents that from happening.

I'm not so sure I'd want to use anything from Adipose Industries.

But the fat just walks away!

Until the day they need to make a break for it because a certain nosy Doctor and a certain nosy redhead start prying around their headquarters. 

[empirestate]

#287. Car alarms.

I get that, when this was new-fangled 80s technology, it suffered from an unreliable, hair-trigger functionality. But surely by now, we can develop an alarm system that knows the difference between a car being stolen, and NOTHING.


iPhone

[cjk374]

#287. Car alarms.

I get that, when this was new-fangled 80s technology, it suffered from an unreliable, hair-trigger functionality. But surely by now, we can develop an alarm system that knows the difference between a car being stolen, and NOTHING.


iPhone

When I was a student at Jolly Polly Prostitute (aka Louisiana Tech University), a train would pass by several times per day and night.  Parking along W. Railroad Ave. was full during the day.  Everytime a train went by, at least a dozen alarms would go off everyday.

[andrewkbrown]

#287. Car alarms.

I get that, when this was new-fangled 80s technology, it suffered from an unreliable, hair-trigger functionality. But surely by now, we can develop an alarm system that knows the difference between a car being stolen, and NOTHING.


iPhone

I've seen car alarms being set off as I rode by parked cars in a fire truck.

[empirestate]

#287. Car alarms.

I get that, when this was new-fangled 80s technology, it suffered from an unreliable, hair-trigger functionality. But surely by now, we can develop an alarm system that knows the difference between a car being stolen, and NOTHING.


iPhone

I've seen car alarms being set off as I rode by parked cars in a fire truck.

Exactly, and to my knowledge nobody has ever stolen a car by driving a truck past it. There's always at least one more intermediate step.

[Pete from Boston]

One technological improvement in car alarms is the "crazy random honking" alarm pattern.  I've seen heads turn from those where regular alarms just annoy the desensitized. 

[mgk920]

One piece of technology should be able to solve that car alarm problem, though - a .50 caliber machine cannon.





Mike

[kkt]

One piece of technology should be able to solve that car alarm problem, though - a .50 caliber machine cannon.





Mike

I really don't think that would make the neighborhood quieter.

[cjk374]

One piece of technology should be able to solve that car alarm problem, though - a .50 caliber machine cannon.





Mike

I really don't think that would make the neighborhood quieter.

Not quieter, but MUCH more safer!