I was just telling some friends that, from my point of view, this new decade seems to really represent the completion of "installing a whole new set of rules" (when it comes to how the world seems to operate).
In the decades after WW II things may have changed, but (with a few exceptions) most of the change was in "amount" (smaller, faster, bigger, more powerful) or in the rate of change, not actually in some totally new direction (IMHO). It seems to me that things just got "MORE", since the end of that war. Whatever trend was begun back then, it seems to me that it just accelerated, not changed direction.
Even with technology, where we laud the changes and the speed of change, the fundamentals are really quite stagnant. Things have not fundamentally changed since the creation of transistors. Yes, we have changed from junction effects to field effects, but the fundamentals are the same. Yes, the "newer, faster, better" items have led to innovations that were not possible using the "old" technology. But it is the same damned integrated circuits. My argument is that the fundamentals had not changed since WW II (or, actually, BEFORE). It can also be argued that even though the underlying technology is quite different, the products brought before the consumers reflect only a size & cost difference between tubes & transistors. Therefore, from that point of view, transistors are just a continuation (or progression) of tubes. Therefore, the technology invented by De Forest and Armstrong has not fundamentally changed since they invented it. Progressed to ever cheaper, faster, and smaller, but not a true fundamental change. Looking back to the early 20th century, many other fundamentals have not really changed. Marketing & advertising, manufacturing, home appliances, architecture, the workings of the economy, building (and home) construction, transportation, communication, entertainment. All these are using the same fundamentals since the beginning of the last century. I think that if you examine the fundamentals of other main aspects of our lives, you will find that they, too, have not really changed.
Don't get me wrong, there HAVE been some interesting, and wonderful, new inventions. The inventions that called for a change in "the basics" were simply not implemented. Too expensive, or not enough vision by the folks with the money. Radical new home designs, for example, contrasted so much with "stick built" homes, that for the most part they were ignored (in ground homes, earth covered, are one example). I'm sure, given a few moments, one can think of other examples.
[Hey, tell me what I missed, or where I'm wrong !!]
From my point of view, this last decade (first of the millennium) seemed to be spent changing everything we know into something new. Really. The way business has to operate (although they don't quite see it yet), the way government needs to operate (again, our leaders don't yet see it), the way the WORLD is functioning [I think Russia & China see it, but the EU, U.S., and Japan (the post-war "western powers") do not yet see what is happening], and even where technology is heading is changing. I can almost see (or imagine) some of the changes taking place in the 1990s, but only when I look back from "here".
I think "human momentum" has now pretty much settled into a general direction, and I'm sure it will change some before it "really settles down".
Two questions assert themselves. One is: "What is next ?".
I wish I knew. I will try to really think about this, but I seriously doubt I can come up with anything that has not already taken place. I'm not that smart.
The remaining question, of course, is how do we bend these new "rules of life" to suit us like we have learned to bend the rules we all grew up with. I suppose that depends on just what these new rules are.
One remaining point. In human nature, as can readily be seen from history, it always costs dearly to cling to something when it is past it's usefulness (when it is over). Throughout history, people, leaders, cultures, and societies cling to something that has been passed by the currents of time, and it always costs far, far, more than it would have to accept and adapt to the changes initially.
The point being that I think we may (yeah, I don't know for sure, so I hedge), be in or entering a "time of change". Much like at the beginning of the industrial revolution, only more encompassing and intense. I am SURE our companies and government do not see it. They do not even have a clue.
If so, we are sure to pay. Very dearly and for an extended period. Those that have the most to lose will cling the tightest to what they have. And we might all pay for the "transition".
Welcome to the new millennium. :-)
