Innovation is overvalued. Maintenance often matters more

Innovation is a dominant ideology of our era, embraced in America by Silicon Valley, Wall Street, and the Washington DC political elite. As the pursuit of innovation has inspired technologists and capitalists, it has also provoked critics who suspect that the peddlers of innovation radically overvalue innovation. What happens after innovation, they argue, is more important. Maintenance and repair, the building of infrastructures, the mundane labour that goes into sustaining functioning and efficient infrastructures, simply has more impact on people’s daily lives than the vast majority of technological innovations. The fates of nations on opposing sides of the Iron Curtain illustrate good reasons that led to the rise of innovation as a buzzword and organising concept. Before the dreams of the New Left had been dashed by massacres at My Lai and Altamont, economists had already turned to technology to explain the economic growth and high standards of living in capitalist democracies.

Study Finds That Buttons in Cars Are Safer and Quicker to Use Than Touchscreens Turns out slapping a giant iPad on the dash isn't ideal to control your car. Button Pusher Many automakers are getting rid of good ol’ fashioned buttons and switches these days, in favor of touchscreen infotainment systems. Now, new evidence shows those touchscreens are far less safe and efficient than the old school alternative, according to the findings of Swedish car magazine Vi Bilägare. Over the summer, the magazine conducted tests across 12 models of cars — eleven modern, along with one 2005 Volvo with physical controls — and allowed test drivers to get to know the ins and outs of the vehicles. The Swedish magazine found that the 2005 Volvo far outperformed the modern, infotainment screen equipped cars, with a driver completing all four tasks in just ten seconds and 1,000 feet traveled. Meanwhile, the best time in the modern cars was nearly 14 seconds. Screening Calls More on cars: BMW Now Selling Drivers Access to Their Cars' Heating Systems for $18 Per Month

My trip to space made me realise we have only one Earth – it must live long and prosper | William Shatner Last year, at the age of 90, I had a life-changing experience. I went to space, after decades of playing a science-fiction character who was exploring the universe and building connections with many diverse life forms and cultures. I thought I would experience a similar feeling: a feeling of deep connection with the immensity around us, a deep call for endless exploration. A call to indeed boldly go where no one had gone before. I was absolutely wrong. As I explained in my latest book, what I felt was totally different. While I was looking away from Earth, and turned towards the rest of the universe, I didn’t feel connection; I didn’t feel attraction. This was an immensely powerful awakening for me. I was born in Montreal in 1931. And of all places, it is in the city where I was born that a crucial meeting of the United Nations is being held. I was the oldest man to go to space. I will do everything I can so that we can protect our one and only home.

What Really Happened When Google Ousted Timnit Gebru news.artnet A computer scientist has filed suit against the U.S. Copyright Office, asking a Washington D.C. federal court to overturn the office’s refusal to grant copyright protection to an artwork created by an A.I. system he built. The work at the center of the suit is titled A Recent Entrance to Paradise, which was generated in 2012 by DABUS, an A.I. system developed by Stephen Thaler, the founder of Imagination Engines Incorporated, an advanced artificial neural network technology company. In November 2018, Thaler applied to register the piece with the copyright office, listing DABUS as the author of the work and stating that it was “created autonomously by machine.” The office refused the application, responding, “We cannot register this work because it lacks the human authorship necessary to support a copyright claim.” The current Copyright Law of the United States grants copyright to “the author or authors of the work.” Further, the motion highlights that the U.S. “Whether A.I. The U.S.