Consider this: The tech prodigies of today are suppressed, or employed by darpa

I feel that today some great scientists and inventors are under some mad scientist banner that stops their creations making any ground.

All the break throughs come from companies and associations like DARPA, northrop etc.

is tech really at a level where no one can make any break throughs any more? I dont think it is and i think that home inventors are simply given zero credit - if its not a tech corp - no news.

originally posted by: Biigs

is tech really at a level where no one can make any break throughs any more?

No.

i think that home inventors are simply given zero credit - if its not a tech corp - no news.

Lots of inventions started life as the tinkerings of some lone engineer. The difference is that the ones who make bold claims and offer no verifiable evidence for said claims get (rightly) ignored.

DARPA etc work on that there is a problem that needs fixing and they define the problem enough so its able to be worked on and pay enough that they don't have to worry about if the problem is solvable with the carrot that if it is solvable a large government cheque is waiting

originally posted by: Biigs
I feel that today some great scientists and inventors are under some mad scientist banner that stops their creations making any ground.

All the break throughs come from companies and associations like DARPA, northrop etc.

is tech really at a level where no one can make any break throughs any more? I dont think it is and i think that home inventors are simply given zero credit - if its not a tech corp - no news.

There are plenty of people who set up startup companies. They sometimes fund themselves or appeal for funds from investors or even the Internet (www.kickstarter.com).

a reply to: Biigs

Using this guy as an example we can determine that suppression has been the machination to hinder human progress...

Couple that with the fact that one needs a grant/permission to advance in any field.

I wonder where we'd be if Tesla was motivated by money, and profit?

I think there is less suppression in the tech fields as there is in the medical field.

Really all you need to blame is laws. The FDA and other government entities like that keep many great things from coming to fruition. In the current climate penicillin wouldn't have been discovered the way it was and millions of lives wouldn't have been saved because it would have taken years and millions of dollars to push it through the FDA.

Same with car technology and a host of other fields.

What is the reasoning that pretty much anyone can make a motorcycle but if you add two extra wheels and some walls it suddenly becomes highly regulated and you are unable to manufacture the automobile without a bunch of rules?

Gurgh.

Also science is highly political and scientists can get really butt hurt when presented with new breakthroughs that go against what they have been believing for some time. Science has all the problems of every other area of human existence. Emotions play as much a part sometimes as truth.

simply put.... no... ever heard of... well you know? the rest of the world?

Science is highly political, but what most people here at ATS go on about in terms of suppression and as you put it above Orphan 'getting their butt hurt' simply is not true. Science is political in terms of crowbaring a tiny ounce of cash out of politicians. Beyond that it is not all that politically motivated. Pure science anyway is not as most of you describe.

My source? Well Iv been in the field for coming up to 10 years now, iv seen people make many a weird statement and they didn't ever have anyone suppress them, smack them down, or any kind of funding cuts or chokes. Maybe though what you say is true, in the US, but as i said before... what about the rest of the world

Except for a few bureaucrats, no one is "employed by darpa." DARPA is essentially a procurement arm of the Department of Defense. It consists of a few people who think up weird out-of-the-box stuff (You know, like the Internet) and offer grants to companies to conduct feasibility studies on the issue. Some of the results are term papers from think tanks on far out ideas, and some result in prototypes of actual products. Yet other grants simply fund research. Most of it is not overtly DoD related, such as weapons production. It's more along the lines of "Is there a way to make jet fuel out of seawater?"

So your concept of DARPA is completely flawed from the beginning. One wonders if the entire post is.

a reply to: schuyler

exactly, and not to mention that the world wide web side of the internet was dreamed up by a Brit working at CERN... the issue is really that many people here on ATS make statements that simply cannot be true, and talk as though science is only taking place under the control of the US... which simply is not the case