Bill Gates is a very rich man today. . . and do you want to know why? The answer is one word: versions.
There are no such things as applied sciences, only applications of science.
It is difficult to think of anything more important than providing the best education possible for our children. They will develop the next technologies, medical cures, and global industries, while mitigating their unintended effects, or they will fail to do these things and consign us all to oblivion.
Have you ever looked inside one of those things [computers]? It's a whole hierarchy of angels- all on slats. And those little tubes-those are miracles.
So I think the winners in recession are the people who produce new technology that does things better, which people really want.
The Internet is the most important single development in the history of human communication since the invention of call waiting.
We cannot idealize technology. Technology is only and always the reflection of our own imagination, and its uses must be conditioned by our own values. Technology can help cure diseases, but we can prevent a lot of diseases by old-fashioned changes in behavior.
The disruption caused by globalization and technology (what Tom Friedman calls hyperconnectedness) will be around for the rest of our professional lives.
I'm an enemy of what I call 'computer theology. ' There's a class conflict out there. There's a techno-elite that lives in a different world.
Normally, I love to go to the movies and when I see a character portrayed by different actors at different ages, it kind of pops a little bit for me. It brings me out of the movie experience. Now we have the technology to cure that.
The greatest existential risks over the coming decades or century arise from certain, anticipated technological breakthroughs that we might make in particular, machine super intelligence, nanotechnology and synthetic biology. Each of these has an enormous potential for improving the human condition by helping cure disease, poverty, etc. But one could imagine them being misused, used to create powerful weapon systems, or even some kind of accidental destructive scenario, where we suddenly are in possession of some technology that's far more powerful than we are able to control or use wisely.
When the PC was launched, people knew it was important.
I've been so entwined with technology since I was about 15, recording myself and multitracking and producing things on my own.
When dealing in the technology, it becomes a question of whether you overuse something. I think that's worse than having something technologically available to you and not using it.
I love using the latest technologies to make life more efficient, but I don't want to advocate that technology replaces the need to get together and enjoy human connections with people.
We are witnessing a seismic change in consumer behavior. That change is being brought about by technology and the access people have to information.
As information technology becomes millions of times more powerful, any particular use of it becomes correspondingly cheaper. Thus, it has become commonplace to expect online services (not just news, but 21st century treats like search or social networking) to be given for free, or rather, in exchange for acquiescence to being spied on.
Anyone who puts a small gloss on a fundamental technology, calls it proprietary, and then tries to keep others from building on it, is a thief.
Living in a time of the increasing struggle of the mechanization of man, photography has become another example of this paradoxical problem of how to humanize, how to overcome a machine on which we are thoroughly dependent. . . the camera.
Things go wrong for me, all the time, with technology. I'm not familiar enough with it, and I'm too old school a brain to be able to figure it out. I'm dumb. Anything that I have to attack with my thumbs, for any period of time, makes me feel stupid. So, I try to avoid it, as much as possible, to protect my thumbs.