If you really want to improve technology, if you want things to work better and be better, you've got to protect the person who spends a lot of effort, money, and time developing that new technology.
I've always been passionate about technology. Starting tech businesses was a very natural extension. Thus, keeping up to date with latest trends is not a process driven activity for me. If one wants to innovate or even survive in today's competitive world, one must keep abreast of emerging new technologies.
The other kind of market like technology is healthcare. Nobody likes the healthcare industry, but on the other hand, everyone wants to live longer. The way I look at it, there's going to be tremendous pressure with healthcare as a percentage of GDP rising with new technology, an aging population, and a business model that basically keeps people alive longer to consume more healthcare products.
Deal with just the basic fact: we will never have enough money for lawyers for poor people. So one of our major initiatives has been to develop new technologies that can help people without a lawyer navigate the legal system, and help sort the cases that really need to have a lawyer from those where an individual with some help online, may be able to manage by him or herself.
In general, workers under 35 highly value Millennials' ability to relate, be helpful, be open-minded, and be understanding. Employees over 35 appreciated their energy, enthusiasm, open-mindedness, fresh perspective, and understanding of new technologies. It is interesting, in my early research, Millennials entering the workforce reported advantages they claimed to have in the workplace. The advantages turn out to be strengths that are recognized in them as managers.
So I think the winners in recession are the people who produce new technology that does things better, which people really want.
Because I had visited Silicon Valley, I recognized the microprocessor was going to lead the second industrial revolution. We Chinese could not miss that opportunity again - we missed the first industrial revolution already. We put our effort into trying to bring this new technology from the United States to Taiwan. That was the begining of Acer.
When the Constitution was written, the founders had no way of anticipating the new technologies that would evolve in the coming centuries.
New technologies will always demand and deserve careful navigation and difficult readjustments. But the weakening or de facto abolition of copyright will not merely roil the seas, it will drain them dry. Those who would pirate what you produce have developed an elaborate sophistry to convince you that they are your victim. They aren't. Fight back.
In the next century, we will be inventing radical new technologies - machine intelligence, perhaps nanotech, great advances in synthetic biology and other things we haven't even thought of yet. And those new powers will unlock wonderful opportunities, but they might also bring with them certain risks. And we have no track record of surviving those risks. So if there are big existential risks, I think they are going to come from our own activities and mostly from our own inventiveness and creativity.
It's very clear that there are greater threats to these ships since, arguably, World War II. There are new technologies that can now reach them and make them harder to defend, such as anti-ship missiles, combined with space based tracking. The bigger issue, though, is who are gaining those capabilities. With what's going on with China and Russia, we are returning to geopolitical state-by-state competition. The Navy has not had to fight a peer for control of the sea since the Battle of Midway 75 years ago.
Anyone developing new products and new technology needs one characteristic above all else: hope.
NEEMO missions are a challenging and exciting aspect of astronaut training. The research we conduct during those missions allows us to test new technologies and exploration concepts in conditions similar to the ones we'll experience in space. They are a great opportunity to help me expand my knowledge and develop new tools for future space exploration.
If we want to implement climate protection worldwide, countries like Germany, which are capable of developing new technologies, will have to hand over some of their knowledge. We can't expect to have our cake and eat it too.
Every time new technology is introduced, especially involving reproduction, you get the 'yuck' effect.
Let us embrace Science and the new technologies unfettered, for it is these which will liberate mankind from the myth of god, and free us from our age old fears, from disease, death and the sweat of labor.
A powerful force drives the world toward a converging commonality, and that force is technology. … Almost everyone everywhere wants all the things they have heard about, seen, or experienced via the new technologies.
Introducing a technology is not a neutral act--it is profoundly revolutionary. If you present a new technology to the world you are effectively legislating a change in the way we all live. You are changing society, not some vague democratic process. The individuals who are driven to use that technology by the disparities of wealth and power it creates do not have a real choice in the matter. So the idea that we are giving people more freedom by developing technologies and then simply making them available is a dangerous illusion.
There's always something in new technology that promotes anxiety on the one hand, but also grieving on the other. With the internet, I think we can remember a time when people said "I don't use email," or "I'm not going to get email." I once had to do a piece on people who had never used the internet and refused to start and I found three people. But when I talked to them, they had used it, at some point or another. It's almost impossible to stay off the internet entirely. We feel as though we didn't get to make a decision. There's this new dawn and we all have to embrace it.
You can't just stop technological progress. Even if one country stops researching artificial intelligence, some other countries will continue to do it. The real question is what to do with the technology. You can use exactly the same technology for very different social and political purposes. So I think people shouldn't be focused on the question of how to stop technological progress because this is impossible. Instead the question should be what kind of usage to make of the new technology. And here we still have quite a lot of power to influence the direction it's taking.
If you look at the history of communication, new technologies like the phone and e-mail didnt just let people do things faster; it fundamentally changed the scope of the kinds of projects people dared to take on.
Actually, because of new technologies, my full studio is on my laptop. And I have a little keyboard in my bag. I can make everything I do come from my laptop. Even when I go to a big studio, all I do is to plug in my laptops. That's they way I do it.
The United States military is now evolving geometrically as it gains experience from near-constant fighting and grafts new technology daily. Indeed, it seems to be doubling, tripling, and even quadrupling its lethality every few years. And the result is that we are outdistancing not merely the capabilities of our enemies but our allies as well - many of whom who have not fought in decades - at such a dizzying pace that our sheer destructive power makes it hard to work with others in joint operations.
Any time a new technology is introduced, like when TV was first invented, everybody was like, "Radio's dead."
I was born in Africa. I came to California because it's really where new technologies can be brought to fruition, and I don't see a viable competitor.
Follow AzQuotes on Facebook, Twitter and Google+. Every day we present the best quotes! Improve yourself, find your inspiration, share with friends
or simply: