Comments on: Muddling Through: How We Learn to Cope with Technological Change

By: Register

Thank you for your sharing. I am worried that I lack creative ideas. It is your article that makes me full of hope. Thank you. But, I have a question, can you help me?

By: binance推薦獎金

binance推薦獎金 — Sat, 21 Mar 2026 18:38:47 +0000

I don’t think the title of your article matches the content lol. Just kidding, mainly because I had some doubts after reading the article.

By: 创建免费账户

创建免费账户 — Fri, 06 Mar 2026 01:57:55 +0000

Your article helped me a lot, is there any more related content? Thanks!

By: b"asta binance h"anvisningskod

b"asta binance h"anvisningskod — Sat, 07 Feb 2026 08:43:07 +0000

I don’t think the title of your article matches the content lol. Just kidding, mainly because I had some doubts after reading the article.

By: Adam Thierer

Adam Thierer — Fri, 20 Jun 2014 13:27:00 +0000

In reply to srp.

srp…

Thanks for the comment. Ironic that you mention Virginia’s book. While I didn’t mention it here, it serves as the foundation for my new booklet on “Permissionless Innovation.” As you will see by flipping through it, I cite Virginia and her book more than anyone else: http://mercatus.org/permissionless/permissionlessinnovation.html

Also, I have repeatedly noted here that “Future and Its Enemies” is one of my favorite books of all time. In this essay, I named it one of the two best books on tech policy of the past half-century: http://techliberation.com/2013/07/12/my-two-favorite-technology-policy-books-of-the-past-half-century

I just didn’t bring it into this discussion because I thought Garreau’s “heaven” / “hell” framing made more sense to discuss in this particular context.

Cheers — Adam Thierer

By: MoReport

MoReport — Fri, 20 Jun 2014 01:53:00 +0000

The current state of technology is unstable; We must rise or fall.
If we fall, our descendents will curse our names long after they
have finally climbed out of the pit we dug for them.

By: srp

srp — Fri, 20 Jun 2014 01:30:00 +0000

You write: “Sadly, when I wrote that earlier piece, I was not aware of a similar
(and much better) framing of this divide that was developed by science
writer Joel Garreau in his terrific 2005 book, Radical Evolution: The Promise and Peril of Enhancing Our Minds, Our Bodies — and What It Means to Be Human” and you go on to cite a number of other works

Somehow you missed 1998’s The Future and its Enemies, which anatomized everything you’re talking about in great detail with copious examples. The key point is that many minds (“stasists”) are instinctively repelled by dynamic spontaneous orders in which the future is an evolving, uncontrolled though generally progressive process. They insist on reducing every social process to a comprehensible static blueprint or prescribed schedule of change. Anything else gives them vertigo and inspires fear and loathing.

By: James Murphy

James Murphy — Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:01:00 +0000

Great article….I also find the prevalence of ‘doom and gloom’ scenarios about technology’s impact on the future mind boggling. My concern is that the endless technophobia from the mainstream media is shaping public opinion to fear technology and the future. You’re right that Americans have a unique ability to ‘muddle through’ and assimilate technological change but with the rate and scope of this change increasing exponentially at some point just ‘muddling through’ won’t be good enough. I’m also ‘long human creativity’ but fear that the overly negative media narrative on technology and change is not only influencing policy but creating a ‘digital underclass’ that will find themselves marginalized at some point–and that’s not good for anyone.