Me and my roommates often like to dwell on how far humanity has managed to advance technologically in its brief history; which usually result in us ping-ponging back and forth various interesting tid-bits about where we are now, where we were then, and where we will be soon. For instance, the first people known to of navigated from one side of Africa around the southern cape then back around north again were the Ancient Egyptians. It took them three years to complete the journey, you can compare that to the Voyager missions in the 1970's that managed to reach Saturn (over 1 billion km's away) in the same amount of time.
It was in the search for bits of info on human technical advancement that I stumbled on this New York Times article and became curious what other people would think of it.
It basically talks about an organization in the US government known as "Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency" or "Darpa" for short. If you havent heard of darpa before, regardless of where you live, they've still effected you. Its a portion of the US government that is "results oriented", and designed to take the brightest minds and direct them towards cracking tough yet revolutionary science and technology.
The key words being "results oriented", this is a research organization seeking to not only research issues but solve the "high-risk technology gambles". Its their results that make them important:Darpa is built around specific projects undertaken by elite scientists and engineers who sign on for several years to provide service to the country. It is results oriented and not meant to be a long-term home for researchers.
In short, this is no kid in a basement with a chemistry set, this is one of the pinnacles for "elite science". The article is of interest to me because it describes the new leader of the Darpa organization. If you read the article it goes into depth on how intense this woman is. She's making a point of aggressively and fairly successfully drag-netting the top universities for the world's brightest and best. As well as putting a heavy and often unreasonable pressure on her co-workers for creative thinking. One of the people she's recruited is Peter Lee, whose the chairman of the Computer Sciences Dept at Carnegie Mellon. The article goes more in depth about his description of her but this is the jist of it:In the past, Darpa has supported the design of the ARPAnet, the forerunner of the Internet and many of the technologies that define the modern computer age, as well as military systems including the stealth fighter, unmanned drone aircraft, the global positioning satellite system [thats GPS], and even the M16 rifle.
For Dr. Lee, it has been an intense experience so far. He said that Darpa had been collegial, but that he had been struck by the challenges that he had been put under by the director.
“It’s what I imagine it’s like working for Steve Jobs,” he said. “The amount of intellectual pressure we’re put under all day, every day is significant and beyond anything in my professional experience.”
It pays off, he said.So you have a woman whose being described as a Steve Jobs-esque catalyst for invention, surrounding herself with the worlds brightest minds, who puts a heavy focus on creative thinking; leading an incredibly well funded research organization notorious for producing results with several departments that focus on things like: "technologies, including social networks, synthetic biology and machine intelligence.". In fact she personally describes the time we're living in as a “renaissance of wonder.". So.... I feel like if half the things in this article are true, we're going to see some revolutionary ideas, science and technology coming out of Darpa in the years to come.
Your thoughts? Are we due for an uber-renaissance on top of what has essentially been a continuous renaissance since the original Renaissance? Or is this media hype?





Reply With Quote







