Sustainable Technology of 2430

Leave a Comment / Sustainable Technology of 2430 / By
79 / 100
Powered by Rank Math SEO

Sustainable Technology of 2430 ?

While it’s impossible to predict the exact nature of technology 400 years in the future, we can speculate on the direction of sustainable technology based on current trends and potential advancements:

Potential Sustainable Technologies in 2430:

  • Advanced Energy Systems:
    • Fusion Power: Potentially a primary energy source, providing clean and abundant power.  
    • Space-Based Solar Power: Harvesting solar energy in space and beaming it to Earth.  
    • Advanced Energy Storage: Highly efficient and compact storage solutions for renewable energy.
  • Closed-Loop Resource Systems:
    • Circular Economy: Near-total recycling and reuse of materials, minimizing waste.  
    • Advanced Material Science: Development of biodegradable and self-healing materials.  
    • Atmospheric Carbon Capture: Large-scale removal of CO2 from the atmosphere.
  • Ecological Restoration and Enhancement:
    • Precision Agriculture: Optimized food production with minimal environmental impact.  
    • Ecosystem Restoration Technologies: Tools to repair and revitalize damaged ecosystems.
    • Biodiversity Preservation: Advanced techniques for protecting and restoring biodiversity.
  • Sustainable Infrastructure:
    • Smart Cities: Urban centers designed for efficiency and sustainability.  
    • High-Speed Transportation: Sustainable and efficient transportation systems.
    • Green Buildings: Structures that minimize their environmental footprint.  

Challenges and Considerations:

  • Resource Availability: Ensuring access to necessary resources for sustainable technologies.
  • Technological Development: Continued innovation and advancement in various fields.
  • Global Cooperation: International collaboration to address climate change and sustainability.
  • Ethical Considerations: Addressing the ethical implications of advanced technologies.

It’s important to remember that this is just speculation. The actual technologies of 2430 may be very different from what we can imagine today. However, by focusing on sustainability and continuing to innovate, we can create a future where technology and the environment coexist in harmony.Sources and related content

What is Sustainable Technology of 2430 ?

It seems you’re interested in what sustainable technology might look like far into the future! It’s a fascinating question, and while we can’t know for sure, we can make some educated guesses based on current trends and potential breakthroughs.

Here are some possibilities for sustainable technologies in 2430:

  • Energy:
    • Fusion power: This could be a primary energy source, providing clean and abundant power.
    • Space-based solar power: Imagine harvesting solar energy in space and beaming it down to Earth!
    • Advanced energy storage: We’d likely have incredibly efficient and compact ways to store renewable energy.
  • Resources:
    • Circular economy: We might have achieved a near-total recycling and reuse of materials, minimizing waste.
    • Advanced material science: Think biodegradable and self-healing materials!
    • Atmospheric carbon capture: Large-scale technology to remove CO2 from the atmosphere could be crucial.
  • Environment:
    • Precision agriculture: Food production could be optimized with minimal environmental impact.
    • Ecosystem restoration technologies: We might have tools to repair and revitalize damaged ecosystems.
    • Biodiversity preservation: Advanced techniques for protecting and restoring biodiversity could be essential.
  • Infrastructure:
    • Smart cities: Urban centers designed for efficiency and sustainability could be the norm.
    • High-speed transportation: Sustainable and efficient transportation systems would likely be in place.
    • Green buildings: Structures that minimize their environmental footprint could be commonplace.

Of course, this is just speculation. The actual technologies of 2430 may be very different from what we can imagine today. But by focusing on sustainability and continuing to innovate, we can create a future where technology and the environment coexist in harmony.

Who is required Sustainable Technology of 2430 ?

That’s a great question! It helps to think about who would benefit most from sustainable technology in 2430. Here’s a breakdown:

  • Humanity as a whole: This is the broadest and most important group. Sustainable technology is essential for our long-term survival and well-being. It ensures access to resources, a healthy environment, and a stable climate for future generations.  
  • Future generations: They will inherit the consequences of our actions today. Sustainable technology is crucial for ensuring they have a livable planet with access to resources and opportunities.  
  • Developing nations: These countries are often the most vulnerable to the effects of climate change and environmental degradation. Sustainable technology can help them build resilient infrastructure, access clean energy, and improve their quality of life.  
  • Ecosystems and biodiversity: Sustainable technology plays a vital role in protecting and restoring ecosystems, preserving biodiversity, and mitigating the impact of human activities on the natural world.  
  • Industries and businesses: Sustainable technologies can drive innovation, create new markets, and improve efficiency. Companies that embrace sustainability will be better positioned for long-term success.  
  • Individuals: We all have a stake in a sustainable future. Sustainable technology can improve our health, reduce our environmental footprint, and enhance our quality of life.  

Ultimately, everyone has a role to play in creating and benefiting from sustainable technology in 2430. It’s a collective effort that requires collaboration, innovation, and a commitment to a better future for all.Sources and related content

When is required Sustainable Technology of 2430 ?

The need for sustainable technology isn’t something relegated to 2430; it’s a critical and urgent requirement now. While we’re speculating about the kind of sustainable technology that might exist centuries from now, the need for it is immediate. We don’t have the luxury of waiting until 2430 to address climate change, resource depletion, and environmental degradation.

Think of it this way: the sustainable technologies of 2430 will be built upon the sustainable technologies we develop today and in the coming decades. If we don’t act now, the world in 2430 might be facing irreversible damage, making even the most advanced technologies insufficient.

So, the answer to “When is sustainable technology required?” is: Now. And every day moving forward. The innovations and practices we implement today are the foundation for a sustainable future, both in the near term and centuries down the line.

COURTESY : Bernard Marr

Where is required Sustainable Technology of 2430 ?

The need for sustainable technology in 2430 (and, crucially, now) isn’t confined to a single location. It’s a global imperative. However, thinking about “where” helps us understand the different contexts and challenges:

  • Globally: Climate change, resource depletion, and pollution are global problems that require global solutions. International cooperation and shared technologies are essential.  
  • Everywhere: Sustainable technology is needed in every country, region, and community. While the specific challenges and solutions may vary, the underlying need for sustainability is universal.
  • Urban centers: Cities are major consumers of resources and generators of waste. Sustainable technologies are crucial for making cities more efficient, resilient, and livable.  
  • Rural areas: Sustainable technologies can support sustainable agriculture, improve access to clean energy and water, and promote economic development in rural communities.
  • Developing nations: These countries often face the most pressing environmental challenges and are particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. Sustainable technologies can help them build resilient infrastructure, access clean energy, and improve their quality of life.  
  • Ecosystems: Sustainable technology is needed to protect and restore ecosystems, preserve biodiversity, and mitigate the impact of human activities on the natural world. This includes forests, oceans, deserts, and all other biomes.  
  • Space: As we venture further into space, sustainable technologies will be essential for resource utilization, waste management, and creating self-sustaining habitats. This might seem like a distant concern, but planning for it now is important.  

In short, the “where” for sustainable technology is everywhere. It’s a universal need that transcends geographical boundaries and applies to all aspects of human activity.  

How is required Sustainable Technology of 2430 ?

That’s a crucial question! “How” sustainable technology is required in 2430 (and, again, now) involves a multi-faceted approach:

1. Innovation and Development:

  • Continued Research: Investing in scientific research and development across various fields, including energy, materials science, agriculture, and environmental science.  
  • Technological Breakthroughs: Fostering innovation and supporting the development of new sustainable technologies.
  • Interdisciplinary Collaboration: Encouraging collaboration between scientists, engineers, designers, and other experts to create holistic solutions.  

2. Implementation and Adoption:

  • Policy and Regulation: Implementing policies that promote sustainable practices and incentivize the adoption of sustainable technologies.  
  • Infrastructure Development: Investing in sustainable infrastructure, such as renewable energy grids, smart cities, and efficient transportation systems.
  • Education and Awareness: Raising awareness about the importance of sustainability and educating people on how to adopt sustainable practices.  

3. Global Cooperation:

  • International Collaboration: Fostering international cooperation to address global environmental challenges and share sustainable technologies.  
  • Knowledge Sharing: Promoting the sharing of knowledge and best practices in sustainable technology development and implementation.
  • Capacity Building: Supporting developing nations in building their capacity to develop and adopt sustainable technologies.

4. Ethical Considerations:

  • Responsible Innovation: Ensuring that technological advancements are guided by ethical principles and consider potential social and environmental impacts.  
  • Equity and Access: Promoting equitable access to sustainable technologies and ensuring that the benefits are shared by all.  
  • Long-Term Vision: Taking a long-term perspective and considering the needs of future generations in technology development and implementation.

5. Individual Actions:

  • Sustainable Consumption: Encouraging individuals to adopt sustainable consumption patterns and make informed choices about the products and services they use.
  • Community Engagement: Promoting community involvement in sustainability initiatives and empowering individuals to take action at the local level.
  • Personal Responsibility: Fostering a sense of personal responsibility for environmental stewardship and encouraging individuals to adopt sustainable lifestyles.  

Ultimately, achieving a sustainable future requires a combination of technological advancements, policy changes, global cooperation, ethical considerations, and individual actions. It’s a complex challenge that demands a holistic and collaborative approach.Sources and related content

Case study is Sustainable Technology of 2430 ?

It’s impossible to provide a true case study of sustainable technology in 2430 because it’s the future! Case studies analyze existing situations. However, we can create a hypothetical case study based on the speculative technologies we’ve discussed, to illustrate what such a case study might look like.

Hypothetical Case Study: The Integrated Carbon Cycle City of “Aethelred” (2430)

Introduction: By 2430, the effects of 21st and 22nd-century climate change are largely mitigated, thanks in part to the widespread adoption of integrated, closed-loop systems. This case study examines Aethelred, a city of 5 million inhabitants, as an example of how sustainable technologies have been integrated into urban life.

Problem: In the early 23rd century, Aethelred, like many coastal cities, faced increasing challenges from rising sea levels and extreme weather events. Traditional infrastructure was proving inadequate, and resource scarcity was becoming a concern.

Solution: Aethelred embarked on a radical transformation, adopting a “Carbon Cycle City” model. This involved:

  • Energy: Aethelred’s primary energy source is a regional fusion power plant, supplemented by space-based solar power beamed to a local receiving station. Advanced energy storage solutions ensure a stable and reliable power supply.  
  • Resource Management: A closed-loop system is in place for all resources. Materials are continuously recycled and reused, minimizing waste. Advanced bio-manufacturing facilities create biodegradable and self-healing materials for construction and consumer goods.
  • Food Production: Vertical farms and hydroponic systems within the city provide a significant portion of the food supply. Precision agriculture techniques are used in surrounding areas, minimizing water and fertilizer use.
  • Water Management: A sophisticated water recycling system ensures that all water is treated and reused. Atmospheric water capture technologies supplement rainfall.
  • Transportation: The city features a network of high-speed, magnetically levitated trains and personal aerial vehicles powered by clean energy. Walking and cycling are also prioritized.
  • Carbon Capture and Sequestration: Atmospheric carbon capture facilities actively remove CO2 from the air. Some of this CO2 is used in the production of synthetic fuels and materials, while the rest is safely sequestered underground.
  • Ecosystem Integration: Green spaces and vertical gardens are integrated throughout the city, providing habitat for wildlife and improving air quality. Artificial reefs and coastal restoration projects protect the city from storms and enhance biodiversity.

Results:

  • Aethelred has achieved near-zero carbon emissions.
  • Resource consumption has been drastically reduced.
  • The city is resilient to extreme weather events.
  • Air and water quality have significantly improved.
  • Biodiversity within and around the city has increased.
  • Residents enjoy a high quality of life, with access to clean energy, nutritious food, and efficient transportation.

Conclusion: The case of Aethelred demonstrates how the integrated application of sustainable technologies can create thriving, resilient, and environmentally responsible cities. It highlights the importance of long-term planning, technological innovation, and a commitment to sustainability for creating a positive future for generations to come.

Note: This is a hypothetical case study. The actual sustainable technologies of 2430 may be quite different. However, it serves as an example of how we can imagine the successful integration of sustainable solutions in the future.

COURTESY : DiscoverMHI (Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.)

White paper on Sustainable Technology of 2430 ?

White Paper: Envisioning Sustainable Technology in 2430

Abstract: This white paper explores the potential landscape of sustainable technology in the year 2430, extrapolating from current trends and anticipating potential breakthroughs. It examines key areas such as energy, resource management, environmental restoration, and infrastructure, acknowledging the inherent uncertainties of long-term prediction while emphasizing the critical importance of present-day actions in shaping a sustainable future.

1. Introduction:

The concept of sustainability has become a defining imperative of the 21st century. As we look centuries into the future, the nature of technology and its relationship with the environment will be drastically different. This paper aims to envision the potential forms and functions of sustainable technology in 2430, recognizing that our current trajectory will significantly influence that future. It’s crucial to understand that this is speculative, based on current trends and potential scientific advancements, not a definitive prediction.

2. Energy:

By 2430, reliance on fossil fuels should be a distant memory. Several potential energy sources could dominate:

  • Fusion Power: Controlled nuclear fusion, if achieved, could provide clean, abundant, and safe energy.
  • Space-Based Solar Power: Harvesting solar energy in space and beaming it to Earth could offer a continuous and highly efficient energy source.
  • Advanced Geothermal: Enhanced geothermal systems could tap into the Earth’s heat with greater efficiency and accessibility.
  • Localized Microgrids: Smart microgrids powered by a mix of renewable sources (wind, solar, hydro) could provide energy independence to communities.

3. Resource Management:

The concept of a circular economy will be fully realized by 2430:

  • Near-Total Recycling: Advanced materials science will enable the near-total recycling and reuse of all materials.
  • Biomanufacturing: Biodegradable and self-healing materials will be commonplace, produced through advanced biomanufacturing processes.
  • Resource Extraction from Waste: Technologies will efficiently extract valuable resources from waste streams.
  • Atmospheric Resource Capture: Technologies for capturing essential elements from the atmosphere (e.g., carbon, nitrogen) will be highly developed.

4. Environmental Restoration:

Reversing the damage caused by past environmental neglect will be a major focus:

  • Advanced Ecosystem Restoration: Technologies will be available to repair and revitalize damaged ecosystems, including forests, oceans, and coral reefs.
  • Climate Engineering: Safe and controlled climate engineering techniques might be used to mitigate any remaining climate imbalances.
  • Biodiversity Preservation: Advanced genetic engineering and biobanking could play a role in preserving and restoring biodiversity.

5. Sustainable Infrastructure:

Cities and infrastructure will be designed for sustainability:

  • Smart Cities: Urban centers will be optimized for resource efficiency, with integrated systems for energy, water, and waste management.
  • Vertical Farms and Urban Agriculture: Food production will be integrated into urban environments through vertical farms and other innovative agricultural technologies.
  • Sustainable Transportation: High-speed, clean transportation systems will connect cities and regions. Personal transportation will likely be dominated by electric or other clean-energy vehicles.
  • Green Buildings: Buildings will be self-sufficient in energy and water, and constructed from sustainable materials.

6. Challenges and Considerations:

Achieving this vision of sustainable technology in 2430 will require:

  • Continuous Innovation: Sustained investment in research and development across multiple disciplines.
  • Global Collaboration: International cooperation to address global environmental challenges.
  • Ethical Frameworks: Careful consideration of the ethical implications of advanced technologies.
  • Behavioral Change: Shifts in human behavior towards sustainable consumption and production patterns.

7. Conclusion:

While predicting the future is inherently uncertain, this white paper offers a plausible vision of sustainable technology in 2430. The technologies described are not merely futuristic fantasies but represent potential pathways based on current scientific and technological trends. The choices we make today will determine whether this vision becomes a reality. Investing in research, fostering innovation, and promoting global cooperation are crucial steps towards a sustainable future for all. The time to act is now, to lay the foundation for the sustainable technologies of 2430 and beyond.

Industrial application of Sustainable Technology of 2430 ?

It’s fascinating to imagine the industrial applications of sustainable technology in 2430! Here are some potential scenarios, building on the technologies we’ve discussed:

1. Manufacturing:

  • Closed-loop production systems: Factories would operate on a near-total recycling model, with raw materials being continuously reused within the production process. Waste would be virtually eliminated.  
  • Biomanufacturing: Advanced biomanufacturing facilities would produce a wide range of goods, from biodegradable plastics to self-healing construction materials, using renewable biological resources.
  • Personalized manufacturing: Highly automated and flexible manufacturing systems could allow for the on-demand production of customized goods, reducing waste and overproduction.  
  • 3D printing with recycled materials: Large-scale 3D printing would utilize recycled materials to create everything from industrial parts to entire structures.  

2. Energy Production and Distribution:

  • Fusion power plants: Fusion reactors would provide clean and abundant energy to power industries.  
  • Space-based solar power stations: Industries would receive a continuous supply of clean energy from space-based solar power systems.
  • Smart grids: Intelligent energy grids would optimize energy distribution and minimize waste.  
  • Energy storage facilities: Advanced energy storage solutions would ensure a stable and reliable power supply for industries, even with fluctuating renewable energy sources.

3. Resource Extraction and Processing:

  • Sustainable mining: Advanced technologies would minimize the environmental impact of resource extraction, with a focus on in-situ processing and minimal waste generation.
  • Atmospheric resource capture: Industries would utilize technologies to capture essential elements from the atmosphere, reducing reliance on traditional mining.
  • Deep-sea mining with minimal impact: If deep-sea mining is necessary, it would be conducted with highly specialized robots and techniques that minimize disruption to fragile ecosystems.

4. Agriculture and Food Production:

  • Vertical farms and hydroponics: Urban-based vertical farms and hydroponic systems would provide a sustainable source of fresh produce for industries involved in food processing.
  • Precision agriculture: Advanced sensors and AI would optimize agricultural practices, minimizing water and fertilizer use and maximizing yields.
  • Cultivated meat and alternative proteins: Industries would produce cultivated meat and other alternative proteins, reducing the environmental impact of traditional animal agriculture.

5. Environmental Remediation and Restoration:

  • Ecosystem restoration technologies: Industries would utilize advanced tools to restore and revitalize damaged ecosystems, including forests, oceans, and wetlands.
  • Carbon capture and sequestration: Industries would actively participate in carbon capture and sequestration efforts, helping to mitigate climate change.
  • Pollution remediation: Advanced technologies would be used to clean up pollution from past industrial activities and prevent future pollution.

6. Transportation and Logistics:

  • High-speed, clean transportation systems: Industries would rely on high-speed, clean transportation systems for the movement of goods and materials.
  • Autonomous vehicles and drones: Autonomous vehicles and drones would optimize logistics and reduce the environmental impact of transportation.
  • Sustainable packaging: Industries would utilize biodegradable and compostable packaging materials to minimize waste.  

These are just a few examples of how sustainable technology could be applied in industries in 2430. The key is that sustainability would be fully integrated into all aspects of industrial activity, from resource extraction to manufacturing to transportation. This would create a truly circular economy where industries operate in harmony with the environment, ensuring a healthy planet for future generations.Sources and related content

Research and development of Sustainable Technology of 2430 ?

It’s exciting to think about the research and development that might lead to the sustainable technologies of 2430! Here are some key areas of focus, building on current trends and potential breakthroughs:

1. Advanced Energy Systems:

  • Fusion Energy: Continued research into plasma physics, magnetic confinement, and materials science to achieve stable and efficient fusion reactors.
  • Space-Based Solar Power: Developing efficient and cost-effective methods for capturing solar energy in space, transmitting it to Earth, and integrating it into existing energy grids.
  • Advanced Geothermal: Researching enhanced geothermal systems to access deeper and hotter resources, along with developing more efficient energy conversion technologies.  
  • Energy Storage: Investing in research on new battery technologies, supercapacitors, and other energy storage solutions to enable the widespread use of renewable energy sources.

2. Resource Management:

  • Materials Science: Developing new materials that are biodegradable, self-healing, and easily recyclable, along with advanced techniques for material synthesis and processing.
  • Biomanufacturing: Researching and developing biomanufacturing processes to produce a wide range of materials and products from renewable biological resources.
  • Circular Economy Technologies: Developing innovative technologies for resource recovery, recycling, and reuse, along with systems for tracking and managing materials throughout their lifecycle.
  • Atmospheric Resource Capture: Researching and developing technologies for capturing essential elements from the atmosphere, such as carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus.  

3. Environmental Restoration:

  • Ecosystem Restoration: Developing advanced techniques for restoring and revitalizing damaged ecosystems, including forests, oceans, and coral reefs.
  • Climate Engineering: Researching safe and controlled climate engineering techniques to mitigate climate change, such as carbon dioxide removal and solar radiation management.
  • Biodiversity Preservation: Developing advanced genetic engineering and biobanking techniques to preserve and restore biodiversity.

4. Sustainable Infrastructure:

  • Smart Cities: Researching and developing integrated systems for managing energy, water, waste, and transportation in urban environments, along with advanced sensors and data analytics.  
  • Vertical Farms and Urban Agriculture: Developing efficient and sustainable methods for growing food in urban environments, such as vertical farms, hydroponics, and aquaponics.  
  • Sustainable Transportation: Researching and developing high-speed, clean transportation systems, such as magnetically levitated trains and advanced electric vehicles.
  • Green Buildings: Developing new materials and technologies for constructing energy-efficient and environmentally friendly buildings.

5. Cross-Cutting Areas:

  • Artificial Intelligence: Utilizing AI to optimize energy systems, manage resources, and improve the efficiency of various sustainable technologies.  
  • Nanotechnology: Applying nanotechnology to develop new materials, improve energy storage, and enhance environmental remediation techniques.
  • Biotechnology: Utilizing biotechnology to develop new biomanufacturing processes, improve agricultural yields, and enhance ecosystem restoration.

It’s important to remember that research and development in these areas is an ongoing process. The sustainable technologies of 2430 will be built upon the discoveries and innovations of today and the coming decades. By investing in research, fostering collaboration, and encouraging innovation, we can pave the way for a sustainable future.Sources and related content

COURTESY : NPTEL-NOC IITM

References

  1. ^ Skolnikoff, Eugene B. (1993). “The Setting”. The Elusive Transformation: Science, Technology, and the Evolution of International Politics. Princeton University Press. p. 13. ISBN 0-691-08631-1. JSTOR j.ctt7rpm1. I find the most useful conceptual definition for this study to be that given by Harvey Brooks, who has defined technology …as ‘knowledge of how to fulfill certain human purposes in a specifiable and reproducible way.’
  2. ^ Salomon 1984, pp. 117–118: “The first pole, that of the naturalisation of a new discipline within the university curriculum, was presented by Christian Wolff in 1728, in Chapter III of the “Preliminary discourse” to his Philosophia rationalisis sive Logica: ‘Technology is the science of skills and works of skill, or, if one prefers, the science of things made by man’s labour, chiefly through the use of his hands.'”
  3. ^ Mitcham, Carl (1994). Thinking Through Technology: The Path Between Engineering and Philosophy. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 0-226-53196-1.
  4. ^ Liddell, Henry George; Scott, Robert (1996) [1891]. Greek-English Lexicon (Abridged ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-910205-8. OCLC 38307662.
  5. ^ Simpson, J.; Weiner, Edmund, eds. (1989). “technology”. The Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0198611868.
  6. ^ Aristotle (2009). Brown, Lesley (ed.). The Nicomachean Ethics. Oxford World’s Classics. Translated by Ross, David. Oxford University Press. p. 105. ISBN 978-0-19-921361-0. LCCN 2009005379. OCLC 246896490.
  7. ^ Salomon 1984, pp. 114–115.
  8. ^ Salomon 1984, p. 117.
  9. ^ Schatzberg, Eric (2006). “”Technik” Comes to America: Changing Meanings of “Technology” before 1930″. Technology and Culture. 47 (3): 486–512. doi:10.1353/tech.2006.0201. ISSN 0040-165X. JSTOR 40061169. S2CID 143784033. Archived from the original on 10 September 2022. Retrieved 10 September 2022.
  10. ^ Salomon 1984, p. 119: “With the industrial revolution and the important part England played in it, the word technology was to lose this meaning as the subject or thrust of a branch of education, as first in English and then in other languages it embodied all technical activity based on the application of science to practical ends.”
  11. ^ Schiffer, M. B. (2013). “Discovery Processes: Trial Models”. The Archaeology of Science. Manuals in Archaeological Method, Theory and Technique. Vol. 9. Heidelberg: Springer International Publishing. pp. 185–198. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-00077-0_13. ISBN 978-3319000770. Archived from the original on 4 October 2022. Retrieved 11 September 2022.
  12. ^ The British Museum. “Our earliest technology?”. smarthistory.org. Archived from the original on 2 September 2022. Retrieved 2 September 2022.
  13. ^ Minogue, K. (28 October 2010). “Stone Age Toolmakers Surprisingly Sophisticated”. science.org. Archived from the original on 10 September 2022. Retrieved 10 September 2022.
  14. ^ Crump, Thomas (2001). A Brief History of Science. Constable & Robinson. p. 9. ISBN 978-1841192352.
  15. ^ Gowlett, J. A. J.; Wrangham, R. W. (1 March 2013). “Earliest fire in Africa: towards the convergence of archaeological evidence and the cooking hypothesis”. Azania: Archaeological Research in Africa. 48 (1): 5–30. doi:10.1080/0067270X.2012.756754. ISSN 0067-270X. S2CID 163033909.
  16. ^ Stahl, Ann B. (1984). “Hominid dietary selection before fire”. Current Anthropology. 25 (2): 151–68. doi:10.1086/203106. JSTOR 2742818. S2CID 84337150.
  17. ^ Wrangham, R. (1 August 2017). “Control of Fire in the Paleolithic: Evaluating the Cooking Hypothesis”. Current Anthropology. 58 (S16): S303 – S313. doi:10.1086/692113. ISSN 0011-3204. S2CID 148798286. Archived from the original on 10 September 2022. Retrieved 10 September 2022.
  18. ^ Dunbar, R. I. M.; Gamble, C.; Gowlett, J. A. J., eds. (2014). Lucy to Language: the Benchmark Papers. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0199652594. OCLC 1124046527. Archived from the original on 14 August 2020. Retrieved 10 September 2022.
  19. ^ Wade, Nicholas (15 July 2003). “Early Voices: The Leap to Language”. The New York Times. Archived from the original on 12 March 2017. Retrieved 7 November 2016.
  20. ^ Jump up to:a b Shaar, Ron; Matmon, Ari; Horwitz, Liora K.; Ebert, Yael; Chazan, Michael; Arnold, M.; Aumaître, G.; Bourlès, D.; Keddadouche, K. (1 May 2021). “Magnetostratigraphy and cosmogenic dating of Wonderwerk Cave: New constraints for the chronology of the South African Earlier Stone Age”. Quaternary Science Reviews. 259: 106907. Bibcode:2021QSRv..25906907S. doi:10.1016/j.quascirev.2021.106907. ISSN 0277-3791. S2CID 234833092.
  21. ^ Hallett, Emily Y.; Marean, Curtis W.; Steele, Teresa E.; Álvarez-Fernández, Esteban; Jacobs, Zenobia; Cerasoni, Jacopo Niccolò; Aldeias, Vera; Scerri, Eleanor M. L.; Olszewski, Deborah I.; Hajraoui, Mohamed Abdeljalil El; Dibble, Harold L. (24 September 2021). “A worked bone assemblage from 120,000–90,000 year old deposits at Contrebandiers Cave, Atlantic Coast, Morocco”. iScience. 24 (9): 102988. Bibcode:2021iSci…24j2988H. doi:10.1016/j.isci.2021.102988. ISSN 2589-0042. PMC 8478944. PMID 34622180.
  22. ^ O’Neil, Dennis. “Evolution of Modern Humans: Archaic Homo sapiens Culture”. Palomar College. Archived from the original on 4 April 2007. Retrieved 31 March 2007.
  23. ^ Villa, Paola (1983). Terra Amata and the Middle Pleistocene archaeological record of southern France. Berkeley: University of California Press. p. 303. ISBN 978-0520096622.
  24. ^ Cordaux, Richard; Stoneking, Mark (2003). “South Asia, the Andamanese, and the Genetic Evidence for an ‘Early’ Human Dispersal out of Africa” (PDF). American Journal of Human Genetics. 72 (6): 1586–1590, author reply 1590–93. doi:10.1086/375407. PMC 1180321. PMID 12817589. Archived (PDF) from the original on 1 October 2009. Retrieved 22 May 2007.
  25. ^ “‘Oldest remains’ outside Africa reset human migration clock”. phys.org. Archived from the original on 11 July 2019. Retrieved 10 September 2022.
  26. ^ Harvati, Katerina; Röding, Carolin; Bosman, Abel M.; Karakostis, Fotios A.; Grün, Rainer; Stringer, Chris; Karkanas, Panagiotis; Thompson, Nicholas C.; Koutoulidis, Vassilis; Moulopoulos, Lia A.; Gorgoulis, Vassilis G.; Kouloukoussa, Mirsini (2019). “Apidima Cave fossils provide earliest evidence of Homo sapiens in Eurasia”. Nature. 571 (7766). Springer Science and Business Media LLC: 500–504. doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1376-z. ISSN 0028-0836. PMID 31292546. S2CID 195873640. Archived from the original on 1 August 2022. Retrieved 17 September 2022.
  27. ^ Kuijt, i., ed. (2002). Life in Neolithic Farming Communities: Social Organization, Identity, and Differentiation. Fundamental Issues in Archaeology. Springer New York. ISBN 9780306471667. Archived from the original on 4 October 2022. Retrieved 13 September 2022.
  28. ^ Coghlan, H. H. (1943). “The Evolution of the Axe from Prehistoric to Roman Times”. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland. 73 (1/2): 27–56. doi:10.2307/2844356. ISSN 0307-3114. JSTOR 2844356. Archived from the original on 26 September 2022. Retrieved 26 September 2022.
  29. ^ Driscoll, Killian (2006). The early prehistory in the west of Ireland: Investigations into the social archaeology of the Mesolithic, west of the Shannon, Ireland. Archived from the original on 4 September 2017. Retrieved 11 July 2017.
  30. ^ University of Chicago Press Journals (4 January 2006). “The First Baby Boom: Skeletal Evidence Shows Abrupt Worldwide Increase In Birth Rate During Neolithic Period”. ScienceDaily. Archived from the original on 8 November 2016. Retrieved 7 November 2016.
  31. ^ Sussman, Robert W.; Hall, Roberta L. (April 1972). “Child Transport, Family Size, and Increase in Human Population During the Neolithic”. Current Anthropology. 13 (2): 258–267. doi:10.1086/201274. JSTOR 2740977. S2CID 143449170.
  32. ^ Ferraro, Gary P. (2006). Cultural Anthropology: An Applied Perspective. The Thomson Corporation. ISBN 978-0495030393. Archived from the original on 31 March 2021. Retrieved 17 May 2008.
  33. ^ Patterson, Gordon M. (1992). The Essentials of Ancient History. Research & Education Association. ISBN 978-0878917044. Archived from the original on 31 March 2021. Retrieved 17 May 2008.
  34. ^ Goody, J. (1986). The Logic of Writing and the Organization of Society. Cambridge University Press.
  35. ^ Cramb, Alan W (1964). “A Short History of Metals”. Nature. 203 (4943): 337. Bibcode:1964Natur.203Q.337T. doi:10.1038/203337a0. S2CID 382712.
  36. ^ Hall, Harry Reginald Holland (1911). “Ceramics” . In Chisholm, Hugh (ed.). Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 05 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. pp. 703–760, see page 708. The art of making a pottery consisting of a siliceous sandy body coated with a vitreous copper glaze seems to have been known unexpectedly early, possibly even as early as the period immediately preceding the Ist Dynasty (4000 B.C.).
  37. ^ Akanuma, Hideo. “The significance of the composition of excavated iron fragments taken from Stratum III at the site of Kaman-Kalehöyük, Turkey”. Anatolian Archaeological Studies. 14. Tokyo: Japanese Institute of Anatolian Archaeology.
  38. ^ “Ironware piece unearthed from Turkey found to be oldest steel”. The Hindu. 26 March 2009. Archived from the original on 29 March 2009. Retrieved 8 November 2016.
  39. ^ Usai, Donatella; Salvatori, Sandro. “The oldest representation of a Nile boat”. Antiquity. 81.
  40. ^ Postel, Sandra (1999). “Egypt’s Nile Valley Basin Irrigation”. Pillar of Sand: Can the Irrigation Miracle Last?. W.W. Norton & Company. ISBN 978-0393319378. Archived from the original on 19 November 2020. Retrieved 25 September 2022.
  41. ^ Crawford, Harriet (2013). The Sumerian World. New York & London: Routledge. pp. 34–43. ISBN 978-0203096604. Archived from the original on 5 December 2020. Retrieved 12 November 2020.
  42. ^ Potts, D.T. (2012). A Companion to the Archaeology of the Ancient Near East. p. 285.
  43. ^ Childe, V. Gordon (1928). New Light on the Most Ancient East. p. 110.
  44. ^ Anthony, David A. (2007). The Horse, the Wheel, and Language: How Bronze-Age Riders from the Eurasian Steppes Shaped the Modern World. Princeton: Princeton University Press. p. 67. ISBN 978-0691058870.
  45. ^ Gasser, Aleksander (March 2003). “World’s Oldest Wheel Found in Slovenia”. Republic of Slovenia Government Communication Office. Archived from the original on 26 August 2016. Retrieved 8 November 2016.
  46. ^ Kramer, Samuel Noah (1963). The Sumerians: Their History, Culture, and Character. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p. 290. ISBN 978-0226452388. Archived from the original on 8 August 2014. Retrieved 26 October 2017.
  47. ^ Jump up to:a b Moorey, Peter Roger Stuart (1999) [1994]. Ancient Mesopotamian Materials and Industries: The Archaeological Evidence. Winona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns. p. 146. ISBN 978-1575060422. Archived from the original on 17 October 2017. Retrieved 26 October 2017.
  48. ^ Jump up to:a b Lay, M G (1992). Ways of the World. Sydney: Primavera Press. p. 28. ISBN 978-1875368051.
  49. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f g Gregersen, Erik (2012). The Complete History of Wheeled Transportation: From Cars and Trucks to Buses and Bikes. New York: Britannica Educational Publishing. p. 130. ISBN 978-1615307012. Archived from the original on 31 March 2021. Retrieved 12 November 2020.
  50. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f g Aicher, Peter J. (1995). Guide to the Aqueducts of Ancient Rome. Wauconda, IL: Bolchazy-Carducci Publishers, Inc. p. 6. ISBN 978-0865162822. Archived from the original on 5 December 2020. Retrieved 12 November 2020.
  51. ^ Jump up to:a b c Eslamian, Saeid (2014). Handbook of Engineering Hydrology: Environmental Hydrology and Water Management. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press. pp. 171–175. ISBN 978-1466552500. Archived from the original on 10 December 2020. Retrieved 12 November 2020.
  52. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e Lechner, Norbert (2012). Plumbing, Electricity, Acoustics: Sustainable Design Methods for Architecture. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. p. 106. ISBN 978-1118014752. Archived from the original on 31 March 2021. Retrieved 12 November 2020.
  53. ^ Davids, K.; De Munck, B., eds. (2019). Innovation and Creativity in Late Medieval and Early Modern European Cities. Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315588605. ISBN 978-1317116530. S2CID 148764971. Archived from the original on 4 October 2022. Retrieved 11 September 2022.
  54. ^ Courtenay, W. J.; Miethke, J.; Priest, D. B., eds. (2000). Universities and Schooling in Medieval Society. BRILL. ISBN 978-9004113510. Archived from the original on 4 October 2022. Retrieved 11 September 2022.
  55. ^ Deming, D. (2014). Science and Technology in World History, Volume 3: The Black Death, the Renaissance, the Reformation and the Scientific Revolution. McFarland. ISBN 978-0786490868.
  56. ^ Stearns, P. N. (2020). The Industrial Revolution in World History. Routledge. ISBN 978-0813347295.
  57. ^ Mokyr, J. (2000). “The Second Industrial Revolution, 1870–1914” (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 10 September 2022. Retrieved 10 September 2022.
  58. ^ Black, B. C. (2022). To Have and Have Not: Energy in World History. Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 978-1538105047. Archived from the original on 4 October 2022. Retrieved 11 September 2022.
  59. ^ Albion, Robert G. (1 January 1933). “The Communication Revolution, 1760–1933”. Transactions of the Newcomen Society. 14 (1): 13–25. doi:10.1179/tns.1933.002. ISSN 0372-0187. Archived from the original on 4 October 2022. Retrieved 26 September 2022.
  60. ^ Agar, J. (2012). Science in the 20th Century and Beyond. Polity. ISBN 978-0745634692. Archived from the original on 4 October 2022. Retrieved 11 September 2022.
  61. ^ Goldin, C.; Katz, L. F. (2010). The Race between Education and Technology. Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0674037731. Archived from the original on 4 October 2022. Retrieved 11 September 2022.
  62. ^ Solow, Robert M. (1957). “Technical Change and the Aggregate Production Function”. The Review of Economics and Statistics. 39 (3): 312–320. doi:10.2307/1926047. ISSN 0034-6535. JSTOR 1926047. Archived from the original on 15 January 2023. Retrieved 15 January 2023.
  63. ^ Bresnahan, Timothy F.; Trajtenberg, M. (1 January 1995). “General purpose technologies ‘Engines of growth’?”. Journal of Econometrics. 65 (1): 83–108. doi:10.1016/0304-4076(94)01598-T. ISSN 0304-4076.
  64. ^ Wrigley, E. A (13 March 2013). “Energy and the English Industrial Revolution”. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences. 371 (1986): 20110568. Bibcode:2013RSPTA.37110568W. doi:10.1098/rsta.2011.0568. PMID 23359739. S2CID 10624423.
  65. ^ Persily, Nathaniel; Tucker, Joshua A., eds. (2020). Social Media and Democracy: The State of the Field, Prospects for Reform. SSRC Anxieties of Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781108890960. hdl:11245.1/cf2f5b6a-8dc8-4400-bc38-3317b0164499. ISBN 978-1108835558. S2CID 243715477. Archived from the original on 19 October 2022. Retrieved 19 October 2022.
  66. ^ Autor, D. H. (2015). “Why Are There Still So Many Jobs? The History and Future of Workplace”. Journal of Economic Perspectives. 29 (3): 3–30. doi:10.1257/jep.29.3.3. hdl:1721.1/109476. Archived from the original on 1 September 2022.
  67. ^ Bessen, J. E. (3 October 2016). “How Computer Automation Affects Occupations: Technology, Jobs, and Skills”. Economic Perspectives on Employment & Labor Law EJournal. 15–49. Rochester, NY. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2690435. S2CID 29968989. SSRN 2690435. Archived from the original on 10 March 2024. Retrieved 20 January 2024.
  68. ^ “Robots and Artificial Intelligence”. igmchicago.org. Initiative on Global Markets. 30 June 2017. Archived from the original on 20 September 2022. Retrieved 17 September 2022.
  69. ^ “The Future of Jobs Report 2020” (PDF). www3.weforum.org. October 2020. Archived (PDF) from the original on 15 January 2023. Retrieved 16 January 2022.
  70. ^ “Robots and AI Taking Over Jobs: What to Know | Built In”. builtin.com. Archived from the original on 16 January 2023. Retrieved 16 January 2023.
  71. ^ “How many jobs do robots really replace?”. MIT News | Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 4 May 2020. Archived from the original on 16 January 2023. Retrieved 16 January 2023.
  72. ^ Acemoglu, Daron; Restrepo, Pascual (1 June 2020). “Robots and Jobs: Evidence from US Labor Markets”. Journal of Political Economy. 128 (6): 2188–2244. doi:10.1086/705716. hdl:1721.1/130324. ISSN 0022-3808. S2CID 7468879. Archived from the original on 16 January 2023. Retrieved 16 January 2023.
  73. ^ “Remarks Upon Signing Bill Creating the National Commission on Technology, Automation, and Economic Progress. | The American Presidency Project”. www.presidency.ucsb.edu. Archived from the original on 16 January 2023. Retrieved 16 January 2023.
  74. ^ “Technology and the American Economy” (PDF). files.eric.ed.gov. February 1966. Archived (PDF) from the original on 16 January 2023. Retrieved 16 January 2023.
  75. ^ “If Robots Take Our Jobs, Will They Make It Up to Us?”. The University of Chicago Booth School of Business. Archived from the original on 25 March 2023. Retrieved 16 January 2023.
  76. ^ “GovInfo”. www.govinfo.gov n. Archived from the original on 16 January 2023. Retrieved 16 January 2023.
  77. ^ “H.R.11611 – An Act to establish a National Commission on Technology, Automation, and Economic Progress”. www.congress.gov. 1963. Archived from the original on 16 January 2023. Retrieved 16 January 2023.
  78. ^ Jump up to:a b Rosenberg, Elizabeth; Harrell, Peter E.; Shiffman, Gary M.; Dorshimer, Sam (2019). “Financial Technology and National Security”. Center for a New American Security. Archived from the original on 19 January 2023. Retrieved 19 January 2023.
  79. ^ “U.S. takes aim at North Korean crypto laundering”. NBC News. 6 May 2022. Archived from the original on 19 January 2023. Retrieved 19 January 2023.
  80. ^ “U.S. ties North Korean hacker group to Axie Infinity crypto theft”. NBC News. 15 April 2022. Archived from the original on 19 January 2023. Retrieved 19 January 2023.
  81. ^ Austin, David; Macauley, Molly K. (1 December 2001). “Cutting Through Environmental Issues: Technology as a double-edged sword”. Brookings. Archived from the original on 9 February 2023. Retrieved 10 February 2023.
  82. ^ Grainger, Alan; Francisco, Herminia A.; Tiraswat, Penporn (July 2003). “The impact of changes in agricultural technology on long-term trends in deforestation”. The International Journal Covering All Aspects of Land Use. 20 (3): 209–223. Bibcode:2003LUPol..20..209G. doi:10.1016/S0264-8377(03)00009-7. Archived from the original on 10 February 2023. Retrieved 10 February 2023 – via Elsevier Science Direct.
  83. ^ EPA (19 January 2017). “Climate Impacts on Ecosystems”. Archived from the original on 27 January 2018. Retrieved 5 February 2019. Mountain and arctic ecosystems and species are particularly sensitive to climate change… As ocean temperatures warm and the acidity of the ocean increases, bleaching and coral die-offs are likely to become more frequent.
  84. ^ Union of Concerned Scientists (6 November 2017). “What is Climate Engineering?”. www.ucsusa.org. Retrieved 28 October 2024.
  85. ^ Chaudhry, Imran Sharif; Ali, Sajid; Bhatti, Shaukat Hussain; Anser, Muhammad Khalid; Khan, Ahmad Imran; Nazar, Raima (October 2021). “Dynamic common correlated effects of technological innovations and institutional performance on environmental quality: Evidence from East-Asia and Pacific countries”. Environmental Science & Policy. 124 (Environmental Science & Policy): 313–323. Bibcode:2021ESPol.124..313C. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2021.07.007. Archived from the original on 14 February 2023. Retrieved 14 February 2023 – via Elsevier Science Direct.
  86. ^ Smol, J. P. (2009). Pollution of Lakes and Rivers : a Paleoenvironmental Perspective (2nd ed.). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. p. 135. ISBN 978-1444307573. OCLC 476272945. Archived from the original on 29 April 2024. Retrieved 14 February 2023.
  87. ^ Jump up to:a b Franssen, M.; Lokhorst, G.-J.; van de Poel, I. (2018). “Philosophy of Technology”. In Zalta, E. N. (ed.). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2018 ed.). Archived from the original on 11 September 2022. Retrieved 11 September 2022.
  88. ^ Jump up to:a b de Vries, M. J.; Verkerk, M. J.; Hoogland, J.; van der Stoep, J. (2015). Philosophy of Technology : An Introduction for Technology and Business Students. United Kingdom: Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-1317445715. OCLC 907132694. Archived from the original on 4 October 2022. Retrieved 10 September 2022.
  89. ^ Brey, P. (2000). Mitcham, C. (ed.). “Theories of Technology as Extension of Human Faculties”. Metaphysics, Epistemology, and Technology. Research in Philosophy and Technology. 19.
  90. ^ Jump up to:a b Johnson, Deborah G.; Wetmore, Jameson M. (2021). Technology and Society: Building Our Sociotechnical Future (2nd ed.). MIT Press. ISBN 978-0262539968. Archived from the original on 29 April 2024. Retrieved 18 October 2022.
  91. ^ Dusek, Val (2006). Philosophy of Technology: An Introduction. Wiley. ISBN 978-1405111621. Archived from the original on 4 October 2022. Retrieved 13 September 2022.
  92. ^ Postman, Neil (1993). Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology. New York: Vintage.
  93. ^ Marcuse, H. (2004). Technology, War and Fascism: Collected Papers of Herbert Marcuse, Volume 1. Routledge. ISBN 978-1134774661. Archived from the original on 4 October 2022. Retrieved 11 September 2022.
  94. ^ Hansson, Sven Ove (2017). The Ethics of Technology: Methods and Approaches. Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 978-1783486595. Archived from the original on 4 October 2022. Retrieved 13 September 2022.
  95. ^ Al-Rodhan, Nayef. “The Many Ethical Implications of Emerging Technologies”. Scientific American. Archived from the original on 8 April 2017. Retrieved 13 December 2019.
  96. ^ Luppicini, R. (2008). “The emerging field of Technoethics”. In Luppicini; R. Adell (eds.). Handbook of Research on Technoethics. Hershey: Idea Group Publishing.
  97. ^ Veruggio, Gianmarco (2011). “The Roboethics Roadmap”. EURON Roboethics Atelier. Scuola di Robotica: 2. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.466.2810.
  98. ^ Anderson, Michael; Anderson, Susan Leigh, eds. (2011). Machine Ethics. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0521112352.
  99. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e Bell, W. Foundations of Futures Studies, Volume 1: Human Science for a New Era. Transaction Publishers. ISBN 978-1412823791. Archived from the original on 4 October 2022. Retrieved 12 September 2022.
  100. ^ “About us”. cser.ac.uk. Archived from the original on 30 December 2017. Retrieved 11 September 2022.
  101. ^ Gottlieb, J. (1 May 2022). “Discounting, Buck-Passing, and Existential Risk Mitigation: The Case of Space Colonization”. Space Policy. 60: 101486. Bibcode:2022SpPol..6001486G. doi:10.1016/j.spacepol.2022.101486. ISSN 0265-9646. S2CID 247718992.
  102. ^ “Stanford Existential Risks Initiative”. cisac.fsi.stanford.edu. Archived from the original on 22 September 2022. Retrieved 4 October 2022.
  103. ^ Bostrom, Nick; Cirkovic, Milan M. (2011). Global Catastrophic Risks. OUP Oxford. ISBN 978-0199606504. Archived from the original on 4 October 2022. Retrieved 11 September 2022.
  104. ^ Jump up to:a b Bostrom, Nick (6 September 2019). “The Vulnerable World Hypothesis”. Global Policy. 10 (4): 455–476. doi:10.1111/1758-5899.12718. ISSN 1758-5880. S2CID 203169705.
  105. ^ Kurzweil, Ray (2005). “GNR: Three Overlapping Revolutions”. The Singularity is Near. Penguin. ISBN 978-1101218884.
  106. ^ Kompridis, N. (2009). “Technology’s challenge to democracy: What of the human” (PDF). Parrhesia. 8 (1): 20–33. Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 October 2022. Retrieved 21 February 2011.
  107. ^ McShane, Sveta (19 April 2016). “Ray Kurzweil Predicts Three Technologies Will Define Our Future”. Singularity Hub. Archived from the original on 10 May 2021. Retrieved 10 May 2021.
  108. ^ Poole, C. P. Jr.; Owens, F. J. (2003). Introduction to Nanotechnology. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-0471079354.
  109. ^ Vince, G. (3 July 2003). “Nanotechnology may create new organs”. New Scientist. Archived from the original on 11 September 2022. Retrieved 11 September 2022.
  110. ^ Lee, Sukhan; Suh, Il Hong (2008). Recent Progress in Robotics: Viable Robotic Service to Human: An Edition of the Selected Papers from the 13th International Conference on Advanced Robotics. Springer Science & Business Media. p. 3. ISBN 978-3540767282. Archived from the original on 4 October 2022. Retrieved 13 September 2022.
  111. ^ Grace, K.; Salvatier, J.; Dafoe, A.; Zhang, B.; Evans, O. (31 July 2018). “Viewpoint: When Will AI Exceed Human Performance? Evidence from AI Experts”. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research. 62: 729–754. doi:10.1613/jair.1.11222. ISSN 1076-9757. S2CID 8746462. Archived from the original on 4 October 2022. Retrieved 11 September 2022.
  112. ^ Segal, H. P. (2005). Technological Utopianism in American Culture (20th Anniversary ed.). Syracuse University Press. ISBN 978-0815630616. Archived from the original on 4 October 2022. Retrieved 11 September 2022.
  113. ^ More, M.; Vita-More, N., eds. (29 April 2013). “Roots and Core Themes”. The Transhumanist Reader. Wiley. pp. 1–2. doi:10.1002/9781118555927.part1. ISBN 978-1118334294. Archived from the original on 11 September 2022. Retrieved 11 September 2022.
  114. ^ Istvan, Zoltan (1 February 2015). “A New Generation of Transhumanists Is Emerging”. Interalia Magazine. Archived from the original on 11 September 2022. Retrieved 11 September 2022.
  115. ^ More, M.; Vita-More, N., eds. (29 April 2013). “Future Trajectories: Singularity”. The Transhumanist Reader. Wiley. pp. 361–363. doi:10.1002/9781118555927.part8. ISBN 978-1118334294. Archived from the original on 11 September 2022. Retrieved 11 September 2022.
  116. ^ Blackford, R.; Bostrom, N.; Dupuy, J.-P. (2011). H±: Transhumanism and Its Critics. Metanexus Institute. ISBN 978-1456815653. Archived from the original on 4 October 2022. Retrieved 13 September 2022.
  117. ^ Jones, Steven E. (2013). Against Technology: From the Luddites to Neo-Luddism. Routledge. ISBN 978-1135522391. Archived from the original on 4 October 2022. Retrieved 11 September 2022.
  118. ^ Kelman, David (1 June 2020). “Politics in a Small Room: Subterranean Babel in Piglia’s El camino de Ida”. The Yearbook of Comparative Literature. 63: 179–201. doi:10.3138/ycl.63.005. ISSN 0084-3695. S2CID 220494877. Archived from the original on 6 March 2022. Retrieved 11 September 2022.
  119. ^ Fleming, Sean (7 May 2021). “The Unabomber and the origins of anti-tech radicalism”. Journal of Political Ideologies. 27 (2): 207–225. doi:10.1080/13569317.2021.1921940. ISSN 1356-9317.
  120. ^ Vannini, Phillip; Jonathan Taggart (2013). “Voluntary simplicity, involuntary complexities, and the pull of remove: The radical ruralities of off-grid lifestyles”. Environment and Planning A. 45 (2): 295–311. Bibcode:2013EnPlA..45..295V. doi:10.1068/a4564. S2CID 143970611.
  121. ^ Jump up to:a b Scranton, Philip (1 May 2006). “Urgency, uncertainty, and innovation: Building jet engines in postwar America”. Management & Organizational History. 1 (2): 127–157. doi:10.1177/1744935906064096. ISSN 1744-9359. S2CID 143813033.
  122. ^ Di Nucci Pearce, M. R.; Pearce, David (1989). “Technology vs. Science: The Cognitive Fallacy”. Synthese. 81 (3): 405–419. doi:10.1007/BF00869324. ISSN 0039-7857. JSTOR 20116729. S2CID 46975083. Archived from the original on 10 September 2022. Retrieved 12 September 2022.
  123. ^ Skolimowski, Henryk (1966). “The Structure of Thinking in Technology”. Technology and Culture. 7 (3): 371–383. doi:10.2307/3101935. ISSN 0040-165X. JSTOR 3101935.
  124. ^ Brooks, H. (1 September 1994). “The relationship between science and technology”. Research Policy. Special Issue in Honor of Nathan Rosenberg. 23 (5): 477–486. doi:10.1016/0048-7333(94)01001-3. ISSN 0048-7333. Archived from the original on 4 October 2022. Retrieved 13 September 2022.
  125. ^ Jump up to:a b c Taleb, Nassim Nicholas (2012). Antifragile. Penguin Random House. OCLC 1252833169.
  126. ^ Hare, Ronald (1970). The Birth of Penicillin, and the Disarming of Microbes. Allen & Unwin. ISBN 978-0049250055. Archived from the original on 4 October 2022. Retrieved 12 September 2022.
  127. ^ Wise, George (1985). “Science and Technology”. Osiris. 2nd Series. 1: 229–46. doi:10.1086/368647. S2CID 144475553.
  128. ^ Guston, David H. (2000). Between Politics and Science: Assuring the Integrity and Productivity of Research. New York: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0521653183.
  129. ^ Taleb, N. N. (12 December 2012). “Understanding is a Poor Substitute for Convexity (Antifragility)” (PDF). fooledbyrandomness.com. Archived (PDF) from the original on 21 June 2022. Retrieved 12 September 2022.
  130. ^ Narin, Francis; Olivastro, Dominic (1 June 1992). “Status report: Linkage between technology and science”. Research Policy. 21 (3): 237–249. doi:10.1016/0048-7333(92)90018-Y. ISSN 0048-7333. Archived from the original on 4 October 2022. Retrieved 13 September 2022.
  131. ^ Krieger, Joshua L.; Schnitzer, Monika; Watzinger, Martin (1 May 2019). “Standing on the Shoulders of Science” (PDF). SSRN 3401853. Archived (PDF) from the original on 12 September 2022. Retrieved 12 September 2022.
  132. ^ Oakley, K. P. (1976). “Man the Tool-Maker”. Nature. 199 (4898): 1042–1043. Bibcode:1963Natur.199U1042.. doi:10.1038/1991042e0. ISBN 978-0226612706. S2CID 4298952.
  133. ^ Sagan, Carl; Druyan, Ann; Leakey, Richard. “Chimpanzee Tool Use”. Archived from the original on 21 September 2006. Retrieved 13 February 2007.
  134. ^ Rincon, Paul (7 June 2005). “Sponging dolphins learn from mum”. BBC News. Archived from the original on 4 December 2016. Retrieved 11 November 2016.
  135. ^ Schmid, Randolph E. (4 October 2007). “Crows use tools to find food”. NBC News. Archived from the original on 10 March 2017. Retrieved 11 November 2016.
  136. ^ Rutz, C.; Bluff, L.A.; Weir, A.A.S.; Kacelnik, A. (4 October 2007). “Video cameras on wild birds”. Science. 318 (5851): 765. Bibcode:2007Sci…318..765R. doi:10.1126/science.1146788. PMID 17916693. S2CID 28785984.
  137. ^ McGrew, W. C (1992). Chimpanzee Material Culture. Cambridge u.a.: Cambridge Univ. Press. ISBN 978-0521423717.
  138. ^ Boesch, Christophe; Boesch, Hedwige (1984). “Mental map in wild chimpanzees: An analysis of hammer transports for nut cracking”. Primates. 25 (2): 160–170. doi:10.1007/BF02382388. S2CID 24073884.
  139. ^ Brahic, Catherine (15 January 2009). “Nut-cracking monkeys find the right tool for the job”. New Scientist. Archived from the original on 15 November 2016. Retrieved 11 November 2016.
  140. ^ Müller, G.; Watling, J. (24 June 2016). The engineering in beaver dams. River Flow 2016: Eighth International Conference on Fluvial Hydraulics. St. Louis: University of Southampton Institutional Research Repository. Archived from the original on 24 September 2022. Retrieved 29 September 2022.
  141. ^ Thomas Michaud (2008). “Science fiction and politics: Cyberpunk science fiction as political philosophy”. New Boundaries in Political Science Fiction. By Hassler, Donald M. University of South Carolina Press. pp. 65–77 [75–76]. ISBN 978-1570037368.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Translate »