Is there a limit to technological progress? - Clément Vidal

Many generations have felt they’ve reached the pinnacle of technological advancement. Yet, if you look back 100 years, the technologies we take for granted today would seem like impossible magic. So — will there be a point where we reach an actual limit of technological progress? And if so, are we anywhere near that limit now? Clément Vidal consults Kardashev’s scale to find out.

Lesson by Clément Vidal, animation by CUB animation.

[GamerRusith]

400 years later people looking back at this video will laugh at us.

[frosted]

It's not the amount of energy that a civilization uses, but the efficiency that it can utilize many energy sources that determines its value. For example:
ENIAC (one of the earliest computers) used about 180, 000 watts of power, cost millions, and was very unreliable. Basically a calculator.
The LS-82Z is a basic solar powered calculator that does more than ENIAC, costs $5 and is solar powered.
There might be a day when the efficiency of our technology allows us to do far more than we can now, using far less power.

[jflyer]

Look, if we humans want to even thing about advancing, we first need to get along.

[kcwidman]

Animations for this one were fantastic.

[AbruptAvalanche]

It's a bit hard to accept that the number of potential technological advancements are truly infinite. I would say the short answer is "yes", but we're nowhere close to that limit, nor do we have any idea of where that limit is.

[insertnamehere]

Rip Nikolai Kardashev (April 25, 1932 - August 3, 2019)

[Grashnook]

This video literally never addresses the question it proposes in its title. Abysmal.

[Dominik]

But, is there a limit to technological progress?

[whitemagicalhat]

Case in point: I grew up thinking the Nintendo 64, then later the Nintendo GameCube was the pinnacle of human technological ingenuity. Now, 20 years later, I find that I couldn't have POSSIBLY been more wrong. To quote/paraphrase Exubr1a; "The universe is a chessboard, and technology works because we are learning what moves we can make on that board, and we're getting better at that game all the time." The only barriers to technological progress are human determination and human imagination and the only hard limit is the fundamental laws of the universe, and we don't even yet know all there is to know about HOW the universe works. All of our modern technology relies upon interactions of the electromagnetic force. Can you imagine what technological breakthroughs await us if we could manipulate the remaining 3 fundamental forces in even remotely the same way? Gravity? How about "anti-gravity" propulsion without the use of rockets? The weak and strong nuclear forces? How about direct manipulation of sub-atomic particles to engineer materials at the picometer, or even the femtometer, scale?

[bbbabrock]

Damnit. Idt this video came anywhere near answering the question asked in the title.

[VeggieBond]

The amount of material needed to create a dyson sphere is unimaginable, we need dont have enough material on Earth. And even physically constructing that around our sun is another huge obstacle. Creating this around our sun may cause heat/radiation to stay trapped, which may cause a whole load of other problems. (PS this is what I think so it may not be true either)

[MaverickMustaine]

All advancement after the SNES is useless

[strange_and_magnificent]

It's amazing how much we've achieved, and yet, there's still so much more out there.

[JFrogy]

Technically, you didn't answer the question. *~BURN*

[qasimmir]

I remember watching an episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation called 'Relics' when they came across a Dyson Sphere. As an engineer myself I can tell that the end technological advancement is definitely not now.

[Kitkat-]

it may be mathematically unlikely, but i like to imagine that tabby's star is us bearing witness to the construction of a dyson sphere on a world in our own galaxy.

[Nawwar]

One of the best things about the progress to next level of "Kardashev" scale Civilization is the fact that every one will be equal in wealth, as energy which drive technology progress become so abundant, and this will end the current state of planet mess by very few who control and manipulate world wealth for their benefit against the rest of the planet popultion.

[johnjhill]

Nice how you painted the Sahara *green*. Are you presenting a challenge?

[Freigeist]

The video did not adress the question posed in the title.
Technological progress comes to an end, when every machine has an efficiency of 100% or nearly 100%. At this point no new technology would be required as the perfect maschines have been developed.

[Ideophagous]

The most optimistic model predicts human civilization will be type I within 100 to 200 years, not 400. Don't underestimate the exponential growth of technology.