Aggregated News
If there is an idea associated with technology that needs to be ditched, it's that we are, or will be, witnessing a ‘revolution’.
Whether it is graphene, 3D printing, synthetic biology, shale gas, big data or bitcoin, any new and major discovery, technique or invention invokes the R-word. It’s the go-to phrase for purveyors of techno-hype.
The idea of a revolution isn’t just used to push a particular technology. Responding to climate change, for example, policy-makers like Nicolas Stern have called for a new, low-carbon, industrial revolution. The precise technologies involved and, crucially, the decision-making processes that surround them, seem largely irrelevant. The point is that in revolution lies salvation.
But is revolution an appropriate way of describing how technological change happens, or how it might improve our lives? And if not, then how should we talk about the process instead?
It is easy to see why those with a product or idea to sell or promote draw upon this language. It sounds exciting and progressive. But it is less understandable why journalists...