I think a lot of these technologies are very promising, but in most/all cases, I don’t think they’re analogous to Zoom, in terms of being available right now, for no money, to the average person, able to be used at will, and offering a highly favorable risk/reward ratio.
Embryo selection and brain implants/genetic modification are still relatively immature technologies, and are perceived by many as having serious moral problems (I disagree with this perspective, but it’s very common AFAICT).
I don’t know how common cool roof products are, but they’ve been in commercial use for 20 years. They’re just not perfect for many use cases: they can increase bills in cooler climates, they can promote mold growth via increased condensation on roofs, they can increase the severity of heat islands when a lot of roofs have cool roof coatings, and they cost $.75-$3 per square foot, with the average US house having a 1700 square foot roof (so a $1275-$5100 investment). In the hottest most humid parts of the US, an annual AC bill is about $525 (source), so it might take 2-10 years to pay off even in the hottest parts of the country.
Geoengineering projects, new voting mechanisms, dams, and the Land Value Tax aren’t available to the average person to just “try it and see if you like it,” the way Zoom is
Honestly the closest match to Zoom from this list is probably throwing away all your plastics. Anybody can do it, it’s probably better for the environment in most cases, and really the only thing that’s stopping individuals from doing so is social pressure or mistaken beliefs about the environmental outcomes of actual landfills vs. actual recycling programs.
The distinction between “a cool technology in need of wider investment and adoption on a research and policy level” and “a cool technology where we’re nothing but a social norm away from mass adoption” is important and clear to me, even though I’m passionate about both types of technologies.
I think a lot of these technologies are very promising, but in most/all cases, I don’t think they’re analogous to Zoom, in terms of being available right now, for no money, to the average person, able to be used at will, and offering a highly favorable risk/reward ratio.
Embryo selection and brain implants/genetic modification are still relatively immature technologies, and are perceived by many as having serious moral problems (I disagree with this perspective, but it’s very common AFAICT).
I don’t know how common cool roof products are, but they’ve been in commercial use for 20 years. They’re just not perfect for many use cases: they can increase bills in cooler climates, they can promote mold growth via increased condensation on roofs, they can increase the severity of heat islands when a lot of roofs have cool roof coatings, and they cost $.75-$3 per square foot, with the average US house having a 1700 square foot roof (so a $1275-$5100 investment). In the hottest most humid parts of the US, an annual AC bill is about $525 (source), so it might take 2-10 years to pay off even in the hottest parts of the country.
CLARITY is very cool tech that I hadn’t heard of before, but there’s, shall we say limited demand for brain preservation technology, and as of 2018, it appears there’s still plenty of technical work to be done.
Geoengineering projects, new voting mechanisms, dams, and the Land Value Tax aren’t available to the average person to just “try it and see if you like it,” the way Zoom is
Honestly the closest match to Zoom from this list is probably throwing away all your plastics. Anybody can do it, it’s probably better for the environment in most cases, and really the only thing that’s stopping individuals from doing so is social pressure or mistaken beliefs about the environmental outcomes of actual landfills vs. actual recycling programs.
The distinction between “a cool technology in need of wider investment and adoption on a research and policy level” and “a cool technology where we’re nothing but a social norm away from mass adoption” is important and clear to me, even though I’m passionate about both types of technologies.
Yeah, that’s fair. I didn’t adhere well to the question, I mostly used it as an excuse to rant about ideas-I-wish-would-be-adopted.
Also fair! I learned about some interesting new technologies, so thanks :)