By greatest invention I mean something that had big and positive influence.
Those little straws with the filters inside that allow people to drink contaminated water right from the source.
One of those saved my ass on a solo, overnight kayaking trip. I mostly brought beer, ice and food in my tow-behind cooler because I had a Life Straw.
The trip was hell, most difficult thing I’ve ever done, wasn’t sure I’d make it out. Was good on water until the next day when I finally broke out onto the main creek.
Cut the top off a can and sucked down 7 refills of creek water. Tasted exactly like warm, flat, tap water.
Look into Sawyer water filters. Much easier to use than lifestraws, last longer. Pressure instead of suction.
The smartphone
That was 20th century.
What smartphones existed in the 20th century?
The IBM Simon, Nokia Communicator or Ericsson R380 for example.
Didn’t the iPhone come 2007?
Sure, but the iPhone was far from the first smartphone.
Okay, the iPhone and the smartphones after it. Better? :)
Honestly the iphone was the first big (culturally) smartphone it not the first one.
I totally agree. But the question was about inventions not mass adaption.
That’s like saying Henry Ford invented the car because the Model T was the first widely available one.
I think anything you could call a smartphone had to be from post-2000 though, right?
That’s going to be a tough one to call. Nokia Communicator had diary (calendar), web browsing and email features in the 90s. You could also tether off it, but it was dialup and most phones could do that.
That was pretty much the definition of a smart phone at the time.
It may depend on your culture, but Blackberry and Windows Mobile phones were both fairly common in business circles years before iPhones.
The iPhone was an incremental advancement, not a major invention out of nowhere. The first iPhone was actually pretty crap compared to some models on the market. It wasn’t until the 3G model that iPhones took off.
deleted by creator
We are in a time where a single invention can rarelt be great. For technological development you need thousands of small inventions, each that use previous technological breakthrough through decades of research. And even great things we have, are just refinement and miniaturization of things we already had.
But if a single thing had to be said, I would say mRNA vaccines. Covid vaccines saved milions of lives, were developed in record times, and their technology could be used for HIV or even antitumoral vaccines.
Was going to say that too. Regardless of the motives and driving forces behind the incredible speed at which the vaccines were developed (i.e. certainly a similar urgency could be applied to other diseases killing thousands and millions in poorer countries, but there ain’t as much interest in that), the mRNA technology proved quite powerful and an avenue to continue exploring in future research.
People forget that the research behind those vaccines had been going on for 30+ years. What was accelerated was the trials and the gathering and analysis of efficacy and safety data. The actual vaccine technology had been in existence for around a decade at the time.
You’re right, I often forget about that. It’s still an incredible achievement.
The first successful transfection of designed mRNA packaged within a liposomal nanoparticle into a cell was published in 1989. “Naked” (or unprotected) lab-made mRNA was injected a year later into the muscle of mice.
But on the other hand, first human test was in 2001
but the research began already back in the 60s.
That’s why I’m saying that a single invention that changed the world is not something you can easily find anymore.
That’s why I’m saying that a single invention that changed the world is not something you can easily find.
Came here to say it.
The heroic inventor story is archaic.
Can’t tbink if anythung really, all we’ve done is refined some stuff butmaybe mRNA vaccines ?
Mostly we’ve just enshitified everything and/or made it disposable…From headphones to entire operating systems etc.
I think medical advancement could be as dramatic this century was in the last. However, patent law is likely to hold us back
The Internet Archive. Technically founded in '96, but didn’t come into its own until the mid aughts. It is an awe-inspiring thing that corporate greed has been trying to take from us.
Sodium-ion batteries are likely to be the obvious answer in another decade. Dirt cheap, abundant materials, competitive density.
Skibidi Toilet, specifically this video and this video
Wikipedia (Jan 2001, so barely squeaked in)
Hell yeah on correctly recognizing what year was the first year of the 21st century! Thinking the new millennium started in 2000 is a pet peeve of mine.
The 21st century has been mostly focused on finding new applications of existing technology. A lot of things are changing in pretty much every aspect of life, but nothing is entirely new.
The internet has really changed the shape of our world, but, even though it really kicked off after the year 2000, it was invented during the 20th century.
Something to keep in mind is that humanity is redifining what counts as an invention, a lot of ideas are created all the time, so the bar has been raised significantly.
Also, we need to keep in mind how big corps have been killing innovation in the name of profit. New products are being created all the time, but they are bought by bigger companies and burried. This is happenig because these innovations carry a certain risk that an established company with a good revenue flow is not willing to accept.
Personally, I am excited about the field of Social Computing, it is still at its infancy and has a lot of potential. The main idea is to create alogirthms based on human interactions that solve real world problems. A few questions one may ask include: How misinformation is being spread, and what is the optimal way to fight it? How do we fight corruption and authoriative power? These questions have been approached by a lot of fields, but creating algorithms and proving their effectiveness requires a deep understanding of computer science.
Personally, I am excited about the field of Social Computing, it is still at its infancy and has a lot of potential. The main idea is to create alogirthms based on human interactions that solve real world problems. A few questions one may ask include: How misinformation is being spread, and what is the optimal way to fight it? How do we fight corruption and authoriative power? These questions have been approached by a lot of fields, but creating algorithms and proving their effectiveness requires a deep understanding of computer science.
I’m not a pessimistic person (I’m neutral), but the sinister implications are obvious.
Well, I can see your point of view, after all computer science has been used for a lot of sinister things in our time. However, science is a neutral thing on itself, how we use it makes the difference.
A great example are corporate social media vs the fediverse. While we can all see the good a social media platforms can offer, they way corporate social media have been shaped introduces a lot of problems. Given the circumstances I may argue they were a necessary step, but it’s definitely time for change, and a lot of people (including us right now) are working hard for that change.
Social Computing as field would study this change, how people made decisions, and how it influenced both their lives and the society we live in. It involves asking questions like: How the fediverse came to be? How the transition could have been faster? Or, How it can be used for the greater good?
Of course, these questions can be shaped in an exploitative way like: How the evolution of the fediverse could stopped or slowed down? How the fediverse could be exploited for the gain of the few? etc…
In the end, I believe the question is who is more powerful, a few people with a lot of money, or a lot of people with little money? Right now the few seem to have the upper hand, but if the access to resources is the only difference, then I believe that we can be optimistic as science and technology have always been about doing more with less resources.
In the end, I believe the question is who is more powerful, a few people with a lot of money, or a lot of people with little money?
Coördination is easier for the former.
Most video games
Guys you’re all wrong.
It’s PornHub.
It’s obviously bofa
What’s bofa
Bofa deez nuts
Goteem
CRISPR
Corona vaccines
Online Streaming
Online Maps
Wikipedia
Drone Warfare
LHC
Paris climate treaty
Great list! I would also add to this PCR, the technology that allowed us to map the human genome.
PCR has been around since the 80s, though it has continued getting more efficient and cheaper
CRISPR is the closest we get It might be the honorary winner since it was wasn’t fully exploited until the 21st century, even though it was cloned and being used in the 90s.
Although not very impactful yet, it think aerographene has the potential to be massive.
Social media ;) /s
