Arriving Early with Assholes

To make sense of today’s blog post, you’ll need to first go purchase and read Kevin Kelly’s magnificent book What Technology Wants. And really, you should be reading that instead of coming here anyway. It’s one of those marvelous books that reshapes how you see the past, present, and future.

You’re back? That was fast. Now that you’ve read the book you know its central premise, which is that technology moves in a predetermined direction, built up from the prerequisite technologies that came before. Which is why almost every innovation is co-invented around the globe almost at the same time. And importantly for this blog post, it’s why our narrative that certain individuals are the ones who push humanity forward is false.

I want to argue that not only is the hero narrative of technology false, it’s also dangerous and counterproductive.

First, a reminder of a few examples from Kevin’s book. Calculus was co-invented separately. The theory of natural selection occurred to two people on opposite ends of the earth within mere decades of each other. Powered flight was a race so narrowly won that it is still in dispute!

The “inventor” of a thing usually comes down not to who first made or discovered a process, but who was the loudest about doing so, or who the media seized upon for being the most quotable, photogenic, shocking, absurd, etc. Ransom Olds invented and patented the assembly line, but Henry Ford not only refined it — he had better quips. And now the assembly line belongs to Ford in our popular imaginations.

The inventions that follow this pattern are so numerous that it might as well be all of them. Go research anything you know to be invented by one person, and you’ll begin pulling a very tangled thread. Even the most famous examples, with clear patent histories, are never what they seem. Every American school kid learns that Eli Whitney invented the cotton gin. You either memorized that or you got it wrong on a quiz at some point. Only some know that Eli got the idea from a slave named Sam. Fewer still know that Sam got the idea from his father. And nobody on Earth knows where Sam’s father got the idea or how many others were working on it concurrently.

The point is that our desire for hero worship and our sweeping tales of lone inventors changing the world is absolute nonsense. It’s garbage. Anyone who talks as if General Relativity would never have come to light without Einstein doesn’t know the first thing about how things come to light. They also probably don’t know about David Hilbert. All they know is how wonderful a story it is that a kid who failed his math classes (not true) and couldn’t get into college (also not true) worked in a patent office and came up with a theory so amazing that no one else could ever have thought of it (latter part definitely not true). It was a bonus that he had crazy hair and was immanently quotable.

All this brings us to a kitchen table where I’m sitting with one of the brightest minds and biggest hearts I’ve ever known, listening to how Elon Musk is one of the most important people who ever lived, because electric cars would never have existed without him. Not only was this conversation disappointing and wrong, it highlighted something for me as we pushed back and forth. Even when it’s accepted that Elon acquires companies rather than inventing anything, the same folks suggest that Elon’s antics are worth it because he makes progress quicker than we otherwise would.

This point I gladly grant. And looking back at the most colossal assholes of human history, they do have a tendency to get where they are going faster than people who are saddled with compassion, empathy, values, or an adherence to truth and laws. Cheaters, indeed, get ahead. Cutting corners shaves time. All of this is true.

But is it what we want?

Going back to Kevin’s book, we know that electric self-driving cars powered by a green grid are a technological certainty. How and when we arrive at that point are open for debate and modification. The current system that we’ve settled on is to reward jerks like Steve Jobs and Elon Musk for berating employees so that they might squeeze a little more juice out of them. By giving into our inherent hero worship and the very wrong narrative of how things are invented, we feel beholden to those who cut corners and break laws. We are blind to the fact that we could build different incentives and arrive at the same place just a little bit later while rewarding better behaved humans.

But nope. We’re in such a rush and have such a confused idea of how things are made, that we’d rather arrive early with assholes. And we only have ourselves to blame.


16 responses to “Arriving Early with Assholes”

  1. True that. Thanks for posting.

  2. You had me worried where you were going with this, but of course I should have long since realised I am almost certainly in safe hands.

    I read a short work about 30 years ago ish about the invention of the integrated circuit. Which itself fits nicely into your initial point about history, and makes for fascinating reading about some of the individuals involved. The companies sued each other but also agreed to make the damn things because everything depended on it, so why on earth wait til a court decides!?

    Anyway, to your last point, I think, the book also covered the invention of the transistor. Id be willing to bet right now that it is even more complex that the little I know, but the team managed by flawed individual William Shockley achieved success which caused a revolution. Whether someone else also did, or if it would have happened anyway is irrelevant to this point, that it caused Shockley to write a book, I think, called The Will to Think.

    I have always meant to find this and havent!

    But this book about the chip had an explanation and quotes that showed Shockley had a much clearer view on how to get the best out of workers of all sorts, than the medieval seeming ways of Jobs or Musky.

    And the point was concerned with – what makes you put in your best day, and in return achieve great things.

    Of course now I must find that book and others like it, as far removed from those two. Whether their money can speed things up or not.

  3. Although I agree with the stated premise of Kelly’s book in this post, I think it’s up to us & future historians to recognize the antecedents of our rapidly changing technological world in addition to revealing the “warts” and cement pedestals of our “heros”.

    Not having read the book, I wonder if recognition includes the “shoulders” of writers who had no way of actually making their creative imaginations into reality.

    (Pardon this crass comment on this religious holiday)
    I’ve long said that Jesus Christ had the best PR team of all time.

    1. I nearly fell out of my chair laughing after reading your final sentence. No truer, nor more insightful words have ever been spoken. It was a super long day today (coincidentally, as a result of working for one of the main characters in this post) and I very much needed to see and read that line! Thank you.

    2. Bonnie Parsons Avatar
      Bonnie Parsons

      Yes, but since God picked and gave them His Spirit, of course they would! Speaking of which, I so appreciate being able to have a book that isn’t full of curse words that hurt my soul. Thank you, Mr. Howey! My tender ears of only 68 years listened to WOOL this weekend. Am amazed at your writing.

  4. About ten years ago I read Wait But Why’s Elon Musk series and was impressed. But then the more I paid attention to Musk, the more red flags emerged. There were four or five years where he seemed like Tony Stark come to life. Then he started accusing people of be pedophiles. And amplifying conspiracy theories. Really disappointing.

  5. Isn’t the point that the birth of technology comes amidst the chaos of competition? Not the singularity of one mind? The stampede of minds stealing bites of each other’s ideas in order to advance the holy body of technology to new heights?

  6. Two points:

    1. Humans are bad at the abstract and long-term, and love specific and relevant stories. I’ll idolize the person who invents the cancer treatment that saves my loved one even if I know the invention would still happen plus or minus a few decades on the grand scheme of things. Humans don’t live over a long arc of history, they over-weight towards things that happen in their lifetime.

    2. There is an argument to be made with the acceleration of advancement that as we get closer to the singularity or other exponential effects, including on climate change, every year matters. It’s interesting to watch the importance of weeks in the AI race.

  7. Great article. Brave words that you dont hear vocalized too often but i think a lot of people deep down believe.
    My sister tells me she struggles with bringing up her kids to be kind and gentle because she knows about the sharks. But she does it anyway…while arming them with defences too obviously.
    History deceives. Better teams often arent the champions by luck. The allies commited war crimes too, bombing Tokyo and Dresden etc.

    Treat people the way you would like to be treated.
    Mr Musk doesnt appear to be interested in such simple wisdom at the moment but perhaps he will learn.

  8. I think Einstein was likely 50 years ahead of his time, but even he said he owned much of it to Maxwell who worked out how light propagated.

    Trevor Milton of the fraudulent Nicola company will soon be coming out of his very short prison sentence and into his 35 million Riverside property on 600 acres.

    Makes my blood boil but seems like the whole system is setup to defraud hardworking and savers and reward fraudsters, speculators and dogecoin promotors. A great post.

    1. This: ‘the whole system is setup to defraud hardworking and savers and reward fraudsters, speculators and dogecoin promotors. ‘

      The system is invented over and over again by humans who all share much the same psychology: we look for strong leaders to follow because it’s a survival mechanism. Strong leaders have morphed into ‘heroes’ and heroes are defined as those who succeed. If they cheat and get caught and punished [hah!] then they couldn’t have been real heroes in the first place, so we go searching for the next egomaniac.

      Homo sapiens is its own unique blend of demons and angels. :/

  9. i love your writing Hugh, but this opinion piece belies your idealistic naivety in the same way that Kelly’s book revealed his journalistic naivety (and hubris)

    the unsurprising fact that some inventions (and many more “inventive concepts”) were simultaneously created by different, independent developers, fails to deliver a fatal blow to the phenomenon of tech-hero worship for the simple reason that ideas and strategies are a dime a dozen

    ….the ability to produce a reliable, replicable tech innovation and bringing it to market requires an entrepreneurial skillset well beyond that of a mere engineer, computer scientist, geneticist etc

    this is why Jobs, Musk etc are revered; they put the product in the consumers’ hands, they didn’t just register a patent or build a prototype

    if you just want to hate on Musk for being an unreconstructed capitalist, hate on Musk – you don’t need to undermine his achievements by reference to Kevin Kelly’s ill-conceived, poorly-argued, unfalsifiable theory that ongoing technological innovation is an inexorable law of nature

    this theory evokes little more than a “so what?” from anyone who has attempted to produce innovation, or who has funded it

    human knowledge is cumulative; all inventors build on the work of other inventors and the law of probability indicates that some will think of the same idea at the same time – but “so what?”

    it’s getting the idea to market that unleashes its power on the world

  10. Why are the destroyers of the world in the second book of Silo Democrats? The seven Mountain project 2025 MAGA Trump acolytes would have made more sense ?

  11. I’m letting your books and blogs marinate in my mind along with Martha Beck’s, “Beyond Anxiety,” and Octavia Butler’s, “Parable of the Sower,” series and Paul Hawken’s, “Blessed Unrest,” and Kim Stanley Robinson’s, “Ministry for the Future,”. Plus rereading Donella Meadows and Greta Thunberg.

    Martha Beck’s thesis that we have access to the ultimate field of creative consciousness through the right hemisphere of our brains and your thesis in this blog that no inventions depend on just one hero go along with the idea of the collective unconscious which I think I must first have learned of through Joseph Campbell’s work.

    Your exploration of what happens when we silo ourselves and try to control everything vs trust each other and collaborate seems so related to Martha’s concept of right brain vs left brain tendencies… anxiety spirals of the left brain vs creativity spirals of the right brain. Martha talks about how molecules inside organisms cluster to form cells and plays with the idea that humans naturally gather ourselves into groups (cells) in similar ways when not being choraled into unnatural silos.

    I know it seems like I’m just rambling here. But reading this particular blog post of yours has reminded me of Murray Bookchin’s argument about how we should govern ourselves – in small syndicates – which I learned about in a very obscure book called, “Recovering Bookchin.” And also that Bookchin put forward the idea that technology created by humans is a secondary form of evolution.

    What am I trying to say? Just that I’m grateful to have stumbled across your work, which led me to your blog, which is contributing to the conversation in my head which involves all the authors and thinkers I’ve mentioned here and more, as I flicker in and out of the paralysis of despair and in and out of the elation of creative possibility.

    Where will all of this wool gathering lead? I don’t know. But I’m grateful for the bits you’ve contributed to it.

    Thank you for sharing your own unique creative genius with the world.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *