Invention and Innovation: A Brief History of Hype and Failure
- Downloads：2092
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2023-03-29 09:52:32
- Update Date：2025-09-06
- Status：finish
- Author：Vaclav Smil
- ISBN：0262048051
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
From the New York Times -bestselling author， a new volume on the history of human ingenuity—and its attendant breakthroughs and busts。
The world is never finished catching up with Vaclav Smil。 In his latest and perhaps most readable book， Invention and Innovation ， the prolific author—a favorite of Bill Gates—pens an insightful and fact-filled jaunt through the history of human invention。 Impatient with the hype that so often accompanies innovation， Smil offers in this book a clear-eyed corrective to the overpromises that accompany everything from new cures for diseases to AI。 He reminds us that even after we go quite far along the invention-development-application trajectory， we may never get anything real to deploy。 Or worse， even after we have succeeded by introducing an invention， its future may be marked by underperformance， disappointment， demise， or outright harm。
Drawing on his vast breadth of scientific and historical knowledge， Smil explains the difference between invention and innovation。 He then looks at three different types of inventions。
Inventions that failed to dominate as promised:
Inventions that turned disastrous:
Inventions we have long been promised （and that would be highly beneficial）:
Finally， he offers a “wish list” of inventions that we most urgently need to confront the staggering challenges of the twenty-first century。
Filled with engaging examples and pragmatic approaches， this book is a sobering account of the folly that so often attends human ingenuity—and how we can， and must， better align our expectations with reality。
The world is never finished catching up with Vaclav Smil。 In his latest and perhaps most readable book， Invention and Innovation ， the prolific author—a favorite of Bill Gates—pens an insightful and fact-filled jaunt through the history of human invention。 Impatient with the hype that so often accompanies innovation， Smil offers in this book a clear-eyed corrective to the overpromises that accompany everything from new cures for diseases to AI。 He reminds us that even after we go quite far along the invention-development-application trajectory， we may never get anything real to deploy。 Or worse， even after we have succeeded by introducing an invention， its future may be marked by underperformance， disappointment， demise， or outright harm。
Drawing on his vast breadth of scientific and historical knowledge， Smil explains the difference between invention and innovation。 He then looks at three different types of inventions。
Inventions that failed to dominate as promised:
Inventions that turned disastrous:
Inventions we have long been promised （and that would be highly beneficial）:
Finally， he offers a “wish list” of inventions that we most urgently need to confront the staggering challenges of the twenty-first century。
Filled with engaging examples and pragmatic approaches， this book is a sobering account of the folly that so often attends human ingenuity—and how we can， and must， better align our expectations with reality。
Reviews
Raghu
，
Politicians are not unique in hyping expectations among the public about their projects and their potential to transform society and the world in five years。 Businesses and environmentalists do it， albeit in opposite directions。 Scientists， researchers， and innovative technology companies too promise a new world within a generation or two。 However， reality has been a lot more sobering。 The rapid pace of growth of microelectronics does not translate to other domains。 In this book， Prof。 Vaclav Sm Politicians are not unique in hyping expectations among the public about their projects and their potential to transform society and the world in five years。 Businesses and environmentalists do it， albeit in opposite directions。 Scientists， researchers， and innovative technology companies too promise a new world within a generation or two。 However， reality has been a lot more sobering。 The rapid pace of growth of microelectronics does not translate to other domains。 In this book， Prof。 Vaclav Smil applies his critical， data-driven mind to the history of invention in the past two centuries， shows how we can balance expectations and reality。 He classifies the modern infatuation with invention under three types。 They are， ‘inventions that turned from welcome to undesirable’， ‘inventions that were to dominate - and do not’， and ‘Promised inventions we keep waiting for’。 Towards the end， he presents a wishlist of where we must spend our money and effort because they are the ones we need in the twenty-first century。The book begins with explaining the terms invention and innovation。 They have a large overlap。 Innovation is introducing， adopting and mastering new materials， products， and ideas。 Hence， numerous inventions happen without innovation。 Then， the book turns to the first category - inventions that turned undesirable after being welcomed with open arms when they arrived。 Leaded gasoline， DDT and CFCs are some examples。 Health complications， air pollution， ecological damage， and ozone depletion in the atmosphere were the fears that put a restraint on them。 Exaggerated fear from environmentalists was one major cause that derailed DDT， for example。 Prof。 Smil contests many of those conclusions and brings a balance to the DDT question。 The inventions that were ‘expected to dominate but do not’ include airships， nuclear fission and supersonic flight。 Nuclear fission promised endless free energy through Fast Breeder Reactors， which never happened at the commercial scale。 Last， the inventions we keep awaiting include the Hyperloop， controlled nuclear fusion， and nitrogen-fixing cereals。 Hyperloop is an idea two centuries old and Prof。 Smil points to problems which may never make it a reality。 In nuclear fusion， the book discusses the ITER （International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor） project and its ever-receding horizons。 An agreement among thirty-five countries to build it came in 2006 and it was to be operational by 2016 at a cost of about five billion euros。 The optimistic date now is 2054， and it will cost $200 billion。 The goal is to supply just one percent of global energy demand by 2060！ Hype and failure mark the climate change movement as well。 Prof。 Smil gives us a few examples of the wishful nature of many climate-change related targets。 Global meetings like COP26 set fancy decarbonization targets。 They shoot for 45% less global carbon by 2030， zero carbon emission from US electricity generation by 2035 and net zero global carbon by 2050。 Facts tell us that in the year 2000， fossil fuels supplied 87% of the world’s primary energy。 In 2020， it was 83%， an annual reduction of 0。2 percent。 Net zero in 2050 means we move from 83% to zero in thirty years。 This requires reducing global fossil carbon of 2。75% every year - fourteen times faster than what we achieved between 2000 - 2020。 The author asks where the technical capabilities and necessary financing to realize instantaneously such a large annual cut and sustain it for thirty years are。We hear at regular intervals about green hydrogen transforming all our transportation。 At present， we make hydrogen by reforming fossil fuels like natural gas and coal。 To move to carbon-free electricity from wind and solar and carbon-free fuels like hydrogen， ammonia and synthetic fuels， we need large-scale electricity storage。 Lithium-ion batteries are the choice of storage。 Let us assume we make batteries with energy density an order of magnitude higher than today’s best lithium-ion batteries。 Even then， their energy density would be less than a quarter of the energy density of liquid fuels like gasoline， kerosene and diesel。 These liquid fuels dominate all forms of transportation today。 Making high-density batteries alone is insufficient。 They need to be of unprecedented capacity。 Megacities need them because of the intermittent nature of solar and wind power。 For example， cyclones disrupt Asian megacities often and they need enormous levels of battery storage as backup。 What about the claim of decarbonizing the global fleet of cars by 40 percent by 2030？ In 2021， the world had 1。2 billion cars， SUVs， pickups and vans， and 200 million buses and trucks on the road。 Of these， 99% were gasoline or diesel powered。 Assuming the total fleet remains constant （unlikely！）， we need to make 570 million new electric or hydrogen-fueled vehicles by 2030 to get to 40% decarbonization。 This means we must make 63 million vehicles a year。 It is more than the total production of all cars in 2019。 The electricity to produce them would have to come from zero-carbon sources。 What are the chances of it happening？The Glasgow Climate Pact agreed to cut aviation-related CO2 by 40% by 2030。 This means we cut commercial aviation emissions， now dependent on kerosene， by two-fifths in another eight years through batteries。 Our best batteries have an energy density that is 1/40th of kerosene。 It would require a miracle to make batteries with half or a third of kerosene’s energy density before 2030。 The other fantasy is hydrogen-powered aircraft。 At present， there are no hydrogen-powered airplane in service anywhere。 The challenges of storing liquid hydrogen cooled at -253°C are formidable for this to happen soon。 A forty percent carbon cut means we must have 10000 electric or hydrogen aircraft in service by 2030 to fly 1。8 billion zero-carbon passengers a year。 The global fleet now is 25000 aircraft。 Prof。 Smil concludes by saying even an unprecedented explosion of inventions will not make it happen。 Instead of pouring more money and effort into inventions which won’t happen， the author asks us to look at urgent problems。 Suppose we strive for significant reductions in existing inequalities and for narrowing the health （recurrent morbidity and premature mortality）， education and income gaps。 That means narrowing the most conspicuous differences between one billion people in the affluent economies and the over three billion people in developing countries。 Meeting water， food， energy and material needs would be the priority。 We don’ t need to await new inventions to satisfy the water and food requirements of the poor。 The same is true about electrification and raising the average levels of primary energy use。 In the author’s words， ‘nihil novi sub sole’， meaning ‘there is nothing new under the sun’。Prof。 Smil's arguments have a deep resonance for people from developing countries。 Poor people live in tropical countries where the average annual temperature is a high 28°C。 They feel indifferent when global warming alarmists complain about the average global temperature going fractionally above 14。8°C today。 The book isn't against investing in new inventions。 Nor does it mock innovation。 However， it debunks ideas like terraforming Mars and settling there as a pure fantasy at present。 Prof。 Smil informs us about how we should think about technology， its promises and pitfalls， energy and the future。 Coming from a rigorous scientist and an expert on energy， we must pay attention。 。。。more
Perry
，
A well-rounded review of the history of invention and innovation。 Smil looks at inventions that had unintended consequences （DDT）， were overhyped or failed （air ships， nuclear fission）， and that have not come to pass （hyper loop， nuclear fusion）。 These are complicated topics， but Smil writes about them smoothly and with seemingly encyclopedic knowledge。
Scott
，
I dig me some Vaclav Smil（thanks Bill Gates）。 He digs data and put out fires。 In this case enthusiasm fires。 He always delivers a big dose of rational thought。 Great read。
Audrey
，
There is a Silicon Valley-adjacent techno-optimist group that constantly urges for increasing investment into "innovations" that promise to change the way we live now。 There is also a group that views all "innovations" with skepticism， the consequence of an aggressively capitalist society， and champions "de-growth"。 In this book， Vaclav Smil offers a useful balanced counterpoint to both the sanguine group and the naysayers， acknowledging the significant human flourishing enabled by innovations w There is a Silicon Valley-adjacent techno-optimist group that constantly urges for increasing investment into "innovations" that promise to change the way we live now。 There is also a group that views all "innovations" with skepticism， the consequence of an aggressively capitalist society， and champions "de-growth"。 In this book， Vaclav Smil offers a useful balanced counterpoint to both the sanguine group and the naysayers， acknowledging the significant human flourishing enabled by innovations while highlighting common failure points where such innovations fell short of their initial promise。 Smil organizes the book into three sections for three different types of failure: innovations that were and ultimately fell out of favor due to externalities （leaded gasoline， DDT， CFCs）; innovations that were and failed to meet their promise （airships， nuclear fission， supersonic flight）; and innovations that never came to be （vacuum tube travel， nitrogen-fixing grains， nuclear fusion）。 The cases that he highlights for each failure mode help illustrate the nuances in why， even as science and invention mature， these sometimes fail to translate into society-changing innovations - beyond simple explanations of regulatory obstruction that proponents sometimes default to。 His description of challenges in developing nuclear fission plants， in particular， stood out as succinct and readable， and highlighted his expertise in areas of energy and environment。 The book succeeds in providing a more realistic view of the complicated course of developing innovation from scientific discovery and invention than is popularly depicted in the media。 One question the book provokes but doesn't fully explore is how a savvy consumer， investor， or innovator can learn from some of these common failure modes to champion better and safer technologies。 While some innovations that failed due to externalities were predictable （e。g。 leaded gasoline， where the health effects of lead were known at the time of its development）， others involved "unknown unknowns" （e。g。 CFCs， where iterative waves of invention seemed to bring on new environmental concerns - from the ozone hole to global warming） - how should society consider taking on the "right" amount of risk？ And while the innovations that have yet to be appear to have near-insurmountable challenges at this time （e。g。 technological challenges in nuclear fusion）， many another successful innovation has hinged on a timely discovery that enables the entire apparatus to work - how should society consider further investment in promising technologies when the timing and existence of such hinge points is unpredictable and uncertain？ I only hope Smil continues the exploration of these themes in his future work。 Thank you MIT Press for providing me with an ARC via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review。 。。。more
Bernie Gourley
，
This book is about technological failures， the various ways in which technologies fail， and what lessons can be learned from these failures when hearing about new “world-changing breakthroughs。” The author explores nine technologies in depth， three for each of three varieties of technology failure。tThe first group are those technologies that came online as promised， fixing a major problem， only to later be discovered to have side-effects deemed disastrous。 The examples used are: leaded gasoline， This book is about technological failures， the various ways in which technologies fail， and what lessons can be learned from these failures when hearing about new “world-changing breakthroughs。” The author explores nine technologies in depth， three for each of three varieties of technology failure。tThe first group are those technologies that came online as promised， fixing a major problem， only to later be discovered to have side-effects deemed disastrous。 The examples used are: leaded gasoline， DDT pesticide， and CFC （Chlorofluorocarbon） refrigerant。 These technologies have come to be associated with health defects， air pollution， ecological collapse， and ozone depletion。 tThe second group （like the first） came online， but then never became competitive with existing technologies。 The technologies presented as examples are: airships， nuclear fission for power production， and supersonic flight。 Airships died out not only because of the Hindenburg disaster， but also because people preferred airplanes to a craft with the combined slowness of a boat and the crash potential of a plane。 Nuclear fission became untenable for new commercial power plants due to a risk premium on build costs even though it doesn’t contribute to global warming and （once powerplants are paid for） is exceedingly cheap per kilowatt-hour。 Supersonic flight was just too costly and short-ranged to compete with subsonic flight。 tThe final group are those technologies that failed to come online at all， despite intense efforts。 These include travel by vacuum tube （i。e。 Hyperloop， and， yes， like at the bank but with people inside） nitrogen-fixing grains （negating the need for fertilizer，） and nuclear fusion。 Despite the celebrity billionaire love of Elon Musk and Richard Branson， hyperloop isn’t advancing because of challenges of maintaining vacuum over large distances。 Making cereal grains that feature the nitrogen-fixing capabilities of legumes has also proven more difficult than expected。 Nuclear fusion recently experienced a moment in the sun when， for the first time， they got more energy out of it than was needed to achieve it。 （This wasn’t written about in the review copy I read， but I suspect will be mentioned in the finished book。 At any rate， it doesn’t negate the author’s point as it’s still just one breakthrough of several that would be needed for the technology to be commercially viable。） tIn the last chapter， the author gets into a number of other technologies with shorter discussions that are meant to illustrate specific issues with excessive technological optimism。 He also investigates some technologies that he believes need to come down the pike， given our present and expected future challenges。 tI found this book fascinating。 The author seems to love being contrarian （he not only contests popular optimism by those overestimating technological progress but also contests the pessimism regarding the first group of failed technologies， so it appears that he enjoys pointing out how mass opinion [or the opinion of another smart person] is wrong。） That said， there’s a great deal of thought-provoking information in the book。 And， I think it can help people more critically consider claims about up-and-coming technologies。 。。。more
David Wineberg
，
Vaclav Smil is guaranteed interesting。 He is a numbers man， a scientist and an analyst。 His take on any topic is carefully thought out， and so has impact。 His latest book， Inventions and Innovations was going to be a bit iffy， because there are already so very many books laughing at failed inventions。 I didn’t know how he was going to do anything different or better。 I should not have worried。There are， unfortunately， millions of inventions， fully patented for future embarrassment， that proved t Vaclav Smil is guaranteed interesting。 He is a numbers man， a scientist and an analyst。 His take on any topic is carefully thought out， and so has impact。 His latest book， Inventions and Innovations was going to be a bit iffy， because there are already so very many books laughing at failed inventions。 I didn’t know how he was going to do anything different or better。 I should not have worried。There are， unfortunately， millions of inventions， fully patented for future embarrassment， that proved to be disasters or just never lived up to their hype， I mean potential。 Smil does not wallow there。 He’s not in it for the quick laugh。 Instead， he divided his book into five chapters along these lines: -Inventions that turned from welcomed to undesirable -Those meant to dominate， but did not-Inventions we’re still waiting for-Misplaced techno optimismThanks to this framing， suddenly， not-so-great inventions are worthy subjects。So， for example， inventions that were once welcomed include leaded gasoline， DDT and CFCs， while those meant to dominate include airships and supersonic flight。 An example of something we’re still waiting for is microbiologists getting grains to manufacture their own nitrogen out of the air， like legumes do。 It’s a very thoughtful selection that has implications for all of society。 I would expect no less of Smil。For each one， he explores its origins， applications， and how failure began nibbling at its edges。 Eventually， they all failed completely， some by legislation and some by the weight of their unforeseen problems。 This is all to the good， except that Smil gets too technical。 Between chemistry and electricity， he will probably lose many readers along the way。 That， and the unfortunate choice of using only metric measures， will not help make this book attractive to the American market。 I would have expected Imperial/US measures in brackets at very least。His approach is always technical。 Take just one example from the book: passenger airliners。 The Boeing 707， back in the 1950s， established the best cruising speed to be about 550mph。 It turns out that between the drag coefficient， the shape and dimensions of the passenger tube， and the lift to drag ratio which decreases as you add weight beyond the sweetspot， you have an unarguable airspeed target。 Everything is worse both above and below that speed。 This was why the much lamented Concorde had a tiny cigar tube of a cabin， unsuitable for claustrophobics on transatlantic trips。 It had to trade off space for speed。 As it was， it burned three times as much fuel per passenger mile as the gigantic Boeing 747， which could carry five times as many passengers。 This meant Concorde could not even cross the Pacific without stopping to refuel。 Other Super Sonic Transports have been drawn up， but they all fail。 The bottom line in commercial flight is 。85 of Mach 1 （the speed of sound） is the ideal speed for airliners， and that is why there have been no increases in it since 1958。 That is correct: despite all the innovations over the past 60 years， ideal flight speed was achieved in 1958 and remained unchanged。 Science will do things like that。Smil’s point in all this is that supersonic flight is not the “next natural step” in ever-increasing speed that people think it to be。 Pursuing that goal has proven totally fruitless。 This kind of perspective changes everything。 That’s what readers come to Smil for。Similarly， Smil attacks Elon Musk’s Hyperloop transporter as a worthless idea。 As he shows in a cartoon by William Heath， the vacuum tube transporter goes back to at least 1829， when Heath portrayed it as a failed invention in a drawing crammed with them。 In the cartoon， London passengers are boarding the tube for quick hop over to India/Bengal。Sealing the tube to accommodate all the changes in temperature as well as in air pressure， is currently not possible。 Nor is digging a tunnel from San Francisco to Los Angeles。 Just the approvals needed would by themselves prevent it from ever happening。 And we have lots of examples of digging tunnels for metros。 It is incredibly slow and massively expensive。 Going from city to city is simply out of the question。 Maintaining the vacuum with all the stops， comings and goings and changes in weather and climate is not yet feasible。 Dealing with heat generated and keeping passengers comfortable at the same time， is shall we say， challenging。 This did not stop Elon Musk from bragging he could do it all by himself in 2013。 And yet， in November 2022， he quietly （！） gave up， dismantled his lab and scale model test Hyperloop， and restored the parking lot they occupied。 Musk just never gave it proper （Smil） thought。Another of Smil’s points is that numbers of inventions are actually decreasing， not increasing。 Totally new ideas are getting harder to come by。 There might be lots of activity inventing new dispensers for old products， but dramatic breakthroughs have slowed to a crawl。 Moore’s Law， the doubling of computer chip capacity every 18 months to two years， is coming to its natural end as transmission is now down to one atom’s width in a channel ten atoms wide。 This obviously cannot go on much longer。 But a totally new concept to replace it is nowhere to be found。In medicine Smil’s stats indicate that we aren’t making the dramatic breakthroughs the drug manufacturers brag about。 For example， the five year survival rate for pancreatic cancer patients has tripled thanks to new meds。 But it has tripled from three percent to nine， he says。 The curve on that graph is not particularly hopeful。 And nothing to brag about。Similarly， the so-called war on cancer shows results in the range of pitiful。 Cancer is much more complex and varied than we give it credit for， and wiping it out is nowhere in sight， despite the bleatings of politicians over the decades。 It remains the number two killer of people。 Smil simply says “It is unwise to specify outcomes by dates。” It will always cost more， take longer， and change directions unpredictably。 When a startup announces it will have a new battery ready in five years that will be an order of magnitude more powerful than anything on the market today， you are permitted to laugh。The concluding chapter contains all the fireworks。 Using the same sorts of calculations and reasoning as on all the other inventions， Smil goes after climate change。 He shows irrefutably that Man does not possess the inventions， the history， the resources or the capital to implement the changes needed to avoid disaster。 The historical pattern of carbon reduction， which continues to be an annual increase， shows no hope of plunging 30-50% in the next 15 years， any more than airliners will routinely pass the sound barrier or that batteries will store more energy that petroleum of the same mass。Improvements in batteries， currently in fractions of one percent， give no hope to multiplying storage capabilities in this century， something that both solar and wind systems require， and promise。 Smil says “Even if we got batteries whose energy density was an order of magnitude higher than today’s best lithium-ion batteries， their energy density would still be less than a quarter of the energy density of the refined fuels （gasoline， kerosene， diesel）。” Same goes for living forever and uploading a human brain into a computer。 We are nowhere near the goals， and are not making anything like the progress needed to imagine them ever being real。 Target dates like 2045 are meaningless。What this means for climate change is that all the international conferences and country pledges will not have the promised effects。 There is no precedent for their numbers， and no plans filed that could possibly achieve them。 When they return home， delegates will find no one at all who can implement them。It’s a very dramatic conclusion， because all the stories that precede it give no hint of their relation to the future of the planet itself。 Pure Smil， undistilled。David WinebergIf you liked this review， I invite you to read more in my book The Straight Dope。 It’s an essay collection based on my first thousand reviews and what I learned。 Right now it’s FREE for Prime members， otherwise — cheap！ Reputed to be fascinating and a superfast read。 And you already know it is well-written。 https://www。amazon。com/Straight-Dope-。。。 。。。more
Rick Burcik
，
I have read some of， but not all， Vaclav Smil's wonderful books， and this one is also well worth your time， but it is a little more detailed than I would have preferred。 For example， I didn't need to know the tail numbers for all of the German Zeppelins That said， you should invest the time to read "Invention and Innovation。" Btw， Dr。 Smil and I were likely both students at Penn State in the late 1960s， and while we never met I may have taken one of my father's courses。 I have read some of， but not all， Vaclav Smil's wonderful books， and this one is also well worth your time， but it is a little more detailed than I would have preferred。 For example， I didn't need to know the tail numbers for all of the German Zeppelins That said， you should invest the time to read "Invention and Innovation。" Btw， Dr。 Smil and I were likely both students at Penn State in the late 1960s， and while we never met I may have taken one of my father's courses。 。。。more
Kara
，
Thank you Netgalley for an advanced copy。A somewhat dense academic look at how we humans have created more problems than we have solved with all lot of current technologies。
Pablo
，
A short， sobering book about some of the more egregiously overhyped innovations of the last century， how they got that way， and their outcomes。 I'm an innovation cheerleader so it was hard to swallow， but yes， it's accurate。 Smil covers leaded gasoline， DDT， and supersonic transport as three examples typifying the 20th century， then touches on current topics like controlled fusion， AI， cancer research， and carbon reduction。 It's all very factual and is a good eye-opener for people who blindly su A short， sobering book about some of the more egregiously overhyped innovations of the last century， how they got that way， and their outcomes。 I'm an innovation cheerleader so it was hard to swallow， but yes， it's accurate。 Smil covers leaded gasoline， DDT， and supersonic transport as three examples typifying the 20th century， then touches on current topics like controlled fusion， AI， cancer research， and carbon reduction。 It's all very factual and is a good eye-opener for people who blindly support innovation at all cost （or just expect it）。What Smil doesn't offer is advice on when to take on high-risk， high payoff ventures like these。 Certainly there's value in pursuing big advances for the knowledge gained， for the possiblity of success or spinoffs， or just for their own sake。 Near the end he suggests that resources should be redirected to improving the quality of life everywhere in the world， which means redirecting resources to places where populations are growing the fastest。 Surely that's as pie-in-the-sky as any technological topic in the book， and seems to encourage that kind of growth while discouraging support of high-tech R&D with very longterm payoffs， the kind of work that can only be undertaken in the affluent， population-stable countries。The book portrays the media as the bad guys， with governments and research institutions as overly optimistic， misguided， or poor decision-makers。 Fair enough， but again， no solutions are offered。 How do we course-correct， if we can at all？ Do we vote differently， do we pursue different careers or change our daily habits - what will it take to fix the problems identified here？ Pointing them out is only half the battle。I really enjoyed teh book， challenging as it was to hear all the negativity about things that excite me。 I will be looking into other Smil titles next。 。。。more
Steve
，
I appreciated this book based on the information it provided and its thoughtful and pragmatic approach。 I also liked the discussions of how the media distorts information related to science and technology。 There was also some sarcasm which helped lighten the mood。 But I found the writing style abrupt， with what appeared to be the author’s well-placed anger showing through。 Some of the discussions were complex， with not enough background given。 Thank you to Netgalley and MIT Press for the advance I appreciated this book based on the information it provided and its thoughtful and pragmatic approach。 I also liked the discussions of how the media distorts information related to science and technology。 There was also some sarcasm which helped lighten the mood。 But I found the writing style abrupt， with what appeared to be the author’s well-placed anger showing through。 Some of the discussions were complex， with not enough background given。 Thank you to Netgalley and MIT Press for the advance reader copy。 。。。more
Adelyn
，
It was refreshing to read a book on scientific innovation and history that is fact-based and not sensationalist。 Vaclav Smil does the research， lays out the facts， and connects the dots to support his view point。 I especially enjoyed his break down of what it would take to become carbon neutral by 2050 --- surprise， surprise！ It's basically impossible！ AI and exponential growth bringing immortality in the next 2 decades？ Also unlikely！ The writing is practical， methodical， and well researched。 F It was refreshing to read a book on scientific innovation and history that is fact-based and not sensationalist。 Vaclav Smil does the research， lays out the facts， and connects the dots to support his view point。 I especially enjoyed his break down of what it would take to become carbon neutral by 2050 --- surprise， surprise！ It's basically impossible！ AI and exponential growth bringing immortality in the next 2 decades？ Also unlikely！ The writing is practical， methodical， and well researched。 Fortunately for the reader， there is a bit of humor sprinkled throughout。 Of course， there is a chance I took the author's impatience and exasperation with media and pop culture's glorification of scientific innovation a bit more humorously than he intended。The book summary is very well written and lays out the book like an abstract。 For that reason， I'd recommend this book to anyone who is still curious after reading the book summary。 The sections are well laid out and you will learn an abundance of facts and history around the listed items。Thank you MIT Press for providing me with an ARC via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review。 。。。more
tpg0
，
As an AI language model， I do not have personal opinions， but I can provide information based on research。 The book 'Invention and Innovation: A Brief History of Hype and Failure' discusses the history of innovation and technological advancements， highlighting cases of success and failure。 The author， Allan J。 Lichtman， explores the promotion and marketing of inventions， sometimes leading to exaggerated claims and eventual disappointment。 By looking at numerous examples from the past， including the rise of the personal computer and the hype surrounding alternative energy sources， Lichtman provides insights into the factors that contribute to successful innovation。 The book may be of interest to those interested in the history of technology and innovation， as well as for entrepreneurs and individuals involved in product development。
tpg1
，
As an AI language model， I don't have personal opinions， but I can provide you with a brief overview of the book 'Invention and Innovation: A Brief History of Hype and Failure。' The book written by David Edgerton is an attempt to debunk the conventional narrative of innovation as a linear and triumphant process。 Instead， he argues that innovation is a messy and unpredictable process with a significant amount of failure and hype。 The book provides examples from the history of technology， such as the failure of the British aviation industry to adapt to the jet engine， the hype and disappointment around the Segway， and the unfulfilled promises of nuclear power。 Edgerton also challenges the idea that innovation is exclusively the realm of inventors and entrepreneurs and instead shows that government， society， and culture all play a significant role in technological change。 Overall， the book offers a fresh perspective on the history of innovation， highlighting the importance of acknowledging failure and hype within the innovation process。
tpg2
，
As an AI language model， I don't have personal opinions but I can provide a general description for the book 'Invention and Innovation: A Brief History of Hype and Failure'。 'Invention and Innovation: A Brief History of Hype and Failure' is a non-fiction book that provides insight into the history of technological innovation and the role of hype and failure in shaping it。 The author， Gideon Rosenblatt， explores the ways in which inventors and entrepreneurs have pushed the boundaries of technology and how their efforts have resulted in both success and failure。 He also discusses the impact of technological advances on society and the challenges that arise from the hype surrounding new products and services。 Overall， the book aims to provide a balanced and informative perspective on the history of innovation and the lessons that can be learned from past successes and failures。
Tag
-
invention and innovation a brief history of hype and failure