Newfie wrote:Well I was being facetious. Although sometimes kids do seem to have more common sense and a better grasp of the future than we adults. A better sense of balance.
Hard to see how they could muck it up more than we have.
Well, certainly kids (and adults under 30 or so) are much more flexible and adaptable and have a better sense of how to do "what's new" re tech.
By the time I became reasonably well "established" in the corporate job heirarchy at age 31 or so, I'd already lost much of my technical age re youth, speed, endurance, and enthusiasm. It's the nature of the world.
What dawned on me though, was how strong teams of both younger and older folks, balancing experience, business savvy, and wisdom, and speed, energy, and tech. understanding can be -- if the strengths of the various folks are allowed to flourish instead of trying to cram everyone into the same mediocre, party line, mold.
...
And as I watch newer corporations in tech age and grow -- the end results look about the same.
Microsoft is a relatively youthful IBM, but on its way to obsolescence. Intel is no longer all that dominant and is struggling to lead in various areas. Even the legendary Google is showing all too many signs of the onset of corporate middle age.
Whether it's inherent in our evolution or just the way the system is -- we NEED the young and the old, and the young to replace the old. Many people are excited for the possibility of long life extension, where normal human lifespans of hundreds or even thousands of years are possible. While this would be happy news for the elderly in the short term, it would be an absolute social and ecological disaster for humanity and planet earth's biosphere, IMO. (Even considering the current mess).
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.