#inventions — Public Fediverse posts

“Great inventions are never, and great discoveries are seldom, the work of any one mind. Every great invention is really an aggregation of minor inventions, or the final step of a progression. . It is not usually a creation, but a growth, as truly so as is the growth of the trees in the forest.”*…

Our old friend (and here and here) Brian Potter thinks deeply about scientific and technological advance. Here, he ponders the pace of progress…

In her book on the history of the laser, historian Joan Bromberg notes that the technological and scientific predecessors of the maser (which itself preceded the laser – two critical technologies whose developmental histories I sketched in this piece two months ago) were in place for decades before physicist Charles Townes had the insight to combine them…

… This sort of decades-long wait between when a technology first becomes possible, and when it actually appears, seems common, or at least seems like it might be common. I’ve previously written about why it took so long for wind power to be widely deployed after it became technologically possible, and people often idly speculate whether inventors in the Roman Empire could have built a steam engine, or why we waited so long to put wheels on luggage.

Knowing how long this gap between when an invention becomes possible, and when it actually appears, is useful, because it tells us something about the nature of technology and technological progress. What factors govern whether some new technology appears? How much does mere technical possibility matter, and how much do things like cross-pollination of knowledge, economic feasibility, and political factors contribute? Knowing more about how long it takes for an invention to appear once it becomes technically possible can help us answer these sorts of questions.

I wanted a better sense of how long it takes for some technology to appear once its necessary predecessors are in place. So I used AI to try and find out…

[Potter explains his method, then unpacks his results…]

We can clearly see a few trends on this graph. One is that for most inventions, the gap between when it could have been invented and when it was actually invented is not particularly large. Of the 166 inventions Claude estimated a date for, 107 of them (64%) had an “earliest plausible” date 50 years or less from the actual date, and 150 of them (90%) had an “earliest straightforward” date 50 years or less from the actual date. For more than half the inventions, the average earliest straightforward date of invention was 10 years or less from the actual date.

Conversely, there were a relatively small number of inventions where the gap between “could have been invented” and “was invented” was very large. 30 inventions (18%) had an average gap of more than 100 years between “earliest plausible” and actually invented, and eight inventions had a gap of more than 1000 years. You can see this clearly on a histogram, which shows a large bump of small time gaps, and a long tail of fewer, larger gaps.

The inventions with the longest period between “could have been invented” and “was invented” are below.

There’re a few interesting trends observable here. Many of the longest-delayed inventions — the hypodermic needle, general anaesthetic, stethoscope — are medical inventions. (You could argue the surgical mask could be in this category as well). For the hypodermic needle, this probably needed to wait until the existence of some substance that needed to be injected (such as morphine, first synthesized in 1804), but for other medical inventions this possibly also reflects folks’ reluctance to do inventive-tinkering in a medical context. For general anaesthetic, for instance, the trial and error of getting the dose right was incredibly dangerous, and the inventor Hanaoka Seishu “crippled his mother and blinded his wife perfecting the dose.”

Several of the longest-awaited inventions are ones where the version in the list is an early, impractical version of the one that actually solved a problem. So the “dandy horse” — a two-wheeled, wooden vehicle that was a predecessor of the bicycle — could have been built in antiquity, but the dandy horse wasn’t particularly practical as a means of transportation, and actually useful bicycles had to wait for the improved manufacturing technology of the later 19th century. Likewise, the version of the ballpoint pen that Claude thinks could have been invented much earlier is John Loud’s 1888 version, but Loud’s pen worked poorly and wasn’t successful. Actually useful ballpoint pens are surprisingly difficult to manufacture (China famously couldn’t manufacture them until very recently), and credit for the “useful ballpoint pen” is usually given to Lazlo Biro in 1938. (Claude correctly notes that “useful” versions of both these inventions would need to wait until much later.) Judson’s early zipper and de Martinsville’s early sound-recording device are also examples of early, not-particularly-useful inventions.

Other inventions on this list seem like they might be a case of the surrounding social or technological conditions needing to be right for the invention to appear. So Otis’ elevator safety brake needed to wait until elevators were in higher demand, which probably didn’t occur until steam engines or some other similar power source came along (though maybe you could have water-driven elevators much earlier). Barbed wire perhaps needed to wait until enclosing very large areas of land for grazing became something people needed to do.

And some inventions seem like they might have been genuinely useful had someone thought of them earlier, and simply nobody did. Blanchard’s pattern-tracing lathe, Neilson’s hot blast, and the safety pin all seem like they fall into this category, though perhaps there were good reasons these didn’t appear earlier.

Going back to the scatterplot, the other obvious trend on this chart is that the gap between when an invention becomes possible and when it appears has narrowed over time. If we graph the average and median gaps for inventions by 20-year time periods, we can see that they have fallen over time.

For the 60 post-1900 inventions, every one has a “straightforward” invention date of 50 years or less than the actual date, and 75% of them have a straightforward date of 10 years or less before the actual date. Of the 30 inventions with a gap of more than 100 years between when they could have been invented and when they actually appeared, 29 of them were invented before 1900. So the process for creating new inventions seems to be getting more and more efficient — opportunities are getting noticed and exploited sooner and sooner, up through 1970 at least (which is when the list of major inventions extends to).

We can also look at how wait times vary by type of technology. The chart below shows average wait times by different categories, for both inventions overall and for just post-1900 inventions. We can see that medical inventions have the longest wait, while electronic inventions have the shortest wait…

… We can also look at what types of factors tend to be bottlenecks. For some inventions, the bottleneck is primarily scientific: the limiting factor for the transistor is the band theory of quantum mechanics, and the limiting factor for the radio was Hertz’s demonstration of electromagnetic waves. But for other inventions, it’s primarily technological: the turbojet had to wait not for some new physical theory, but until compressor technology and high-temperature steels appeared; likewise the airplane had to wait not for some novel theory of aerodynamics but until a light enough engine appeared. The chart below shows how often “science” or “technology” was the limiting factor for a given invention, for both inventions overall and post-1900 inventions.

In both cases, technology is the bottleneck far more often than science (though of course if you removed enough technological bottlenecks eventually you’d hit a scientific one, and vice versa).

There is of course only so much you can learn from this sort of exercise: at the end of the day, this is based on an AI’s best guess, not a thorough analysis of the various controlling factors by experts. But while I wouldn’t swear to its accuracy, I think the answers are probably mostly pretty good, and enough for us to draw some general (if tentative) conclusions about the nature of technological progress.

My main takeaway is that we mostly don’t wait all that long for new inventions. Since 1800 most inventions have appeared within a few decades of when it was possible to build them, and since 1900 these gaps been even narrower. It also seems likely that medical inventions are more likely to have long wait times than other types of inventions, and that the limiting factor for how early some new technology could appear is most likely to be technological, rather than scientific.

On the (maybe suprisingly) quick– and quickening– pace of progress: “How Long Do We Wait for New Inventions?” from @constructionphysics.skystack.xyz

* Robert Henry Thurston

###

As we analyze advance, we might send inventive birthday greetings to William Webster (W. W.) Hansen; he was born on this date in 1909. A physicist and one of the founders of the technology of microwave electronics, he had a central hand in the development of klystron technology (essential to high frequency amplification, thus central to microwave technology, radar, and UHF television transmission), and linear accelerators (he led the development of SLAC), and along with the Varian brothers and Edward Ginzton, co-founded Varian Associates (in 1948)–one of the first high-tech companies in Silicon Valley.

source

“Great inventions are never, and great discoveries are seldom, the work of any one mind. Every great invention is really an aggregation of minor inventions, or the final step of a progression. . It is not usually a creation, but a growth, as truly so as is the growth of the trees in the forest.”*…

Our old friend (and here and here) Brian Potter thinks deeply about scientific and technological advance. Here, he ponders the pace of progress…

In her book on the history of the laser, historian Joan Bromberg notes that the technological and scientific predecessors of the maser (which itself preceded the laser – two critical technologies whose developmental histories I sketched in this piece two months ago) were in place for decades before physicist Charles Townes had the insight to combine them…

… This sort of decades-long wait between when a technology first becomes possible, and when it actually appears, seems common, or at least seems like it might be common. I’ve previously written about why it took so long for wind power to be widely deployed after it became technologically possible, and people often idly speculate whether inventors in the Roman Empire could have built a steam engine, or why we waited so long to put wheels on luggage.

Knowing how long this gap between when an invention becomes possible, and when it actually appears, is useful, because it tells us something about the nature of technology and technological progress. What factors govern whether some new technology appears? How much does mere technical possibility matter, and how much do things like cross-pollination of knowledge, economic feasibility, and political factors contribute? Knowing more about how long it takes for an invention to appear once it becomes technically possible can help us answer these sorts of questions.

I wanted a better sense of how long it takes for some technology to appear once its necessary predecessors are in place. So I used AI to try and find out…

[Potter explains his method, then unpacks his results…]

We can clearly see a few trends on this graph. One is that for most inventions, the gap between when it could have been invented and when it was actually invented is not particularly large. Of the 166 inventions Claude estimated a date for, 107 of them (64%) had an “earliest plausible” date 50 years or less from the actual date, and 150 of them (90%) had an “earliest straightforward” date 50 years or less from the actual date. For more than half the inventions, the average earliest straightforward date of invention was 10 years or less from the actual date.

Conversely, there were a relatively small number of inventions where the gap between “could have been invented” and “was invented” was very large. 30 inventions (18%) had an average gap of more than 100 years between “earliest plausible” and actually invented, and eight inventions had a gap of more than 1000 years. You can see this clearly on a histogram, which shows a large bump of small time gaps, and a long tail of fewer, larger gaps.

The inventions with the longest period between “could have been invented” and “was invented” are below.

There’re a few interesting trends observable here. Many of the longest-delayed inventions — the hypodermic needle, general anaesthetic, stethoscope — are medical inventions. (You could argue the surgical mask could be in this category as well). For the hypodermic needle, this probably needed to wait until the existence of some substance that needed to be injected (such as morphine, first synthesized in 1804), but for other medical inventions this possibly also reflects folks’ reluctance to do inventive-tinkering in a medical context. For general anaesthetic, for instance, the trial and error of getting the dose right was incredibly dangerous, and the inventor Hanaoka Seishu “crippled his mother and blinded his wife perfecting the dose.”

Several of the longest-awaited inventions are ones where the version in the list is an early, impractical version of the one that actually solved a problem. So the “dandy horse” — a two-wheeled, wooden vehicle that was a predecessor of the bicycle — could have been built in antiquity, but the dandy horse wasn’t particularly practical as a means of transportation, and actually useful bicycles had to wait for the improved manufacturing technology of the later 19th century. Likewise, the version of the ballpoint pen that Claude thinks could have been invented much earlier is John Loud’s 1888 version, but Loud’s pen worked poorly and wasn’t successful. Actually useful ballpoint pens are surprisingly difficult to manufacture (China famously couldn’t manufacture them until very recently), and credit for the “useful ballpoint pen” is usually given to Lazlo Biro in 1938. (Claude correctly notes that “useful” versions of both these inventions would need to wait until much later.) Judson’s early zipper and de Martinsville’s early sound-recording device are also examples of early, not-particularly-useful inventions.

Other inventions on this list seem like they might be a case of the surrounding social or technological conditions needing to be right for the invention to appear. So Otis’ elevator safety brake needed to wait until elevators were in higher demand, which probably didn’t occur until steam engines or some other similar power source came along (though maybe you could have water-driven elevators much earlier). Barbed wire perhaps needed to wait until enclosing very large areas of land for grazing became something people needed to do.

And some inventions seem like they might have been genuinely useful had someone thought of them earlier, and simply nobody did. Blanchard’s pattern-tracing lathe, Neilson’s hot blast, and the safety pin all seem like they fall into this category, though perhaps there were good reasons these didn’t appear earlier.

Going back to the scatterplot, the other obvious trend on this chart is that the gap between when an invention becomes possible and when it appears has narrowed over time. If we graph the average and median gaps for inventions by 20-year time periods, we can see that they have fallen over time.

For the 60 post-1900 inventions, every one has a “straightforward” invention date of 50 years or less than the actual date, and 75% of them have a straightforward date of 10 years or less before the actual date. Of the 30 inventions with a gap of more than 100 years between when they could have been invented and when they actually appeared, 29 of them were invented before 1900. So the process for creating new inventions seems to be getting more and more efficient — opportunities are getting noticed and exploited sooner and sooner, up through 1970 at least (which is when the list of major inventions extends to).

We can also look at how wait times vary by type of technology. The chart below shows average wait times by different categories, for both inventions overall and for just post-1900 inventions. We can see that medical inventions have the longest wait, while electronic inventions have the shortest wait…

… We can also look at what types of factors tend to be bottlenecks. For some inventions, the bottleneck is primarily scientific: the limiting factor for the transistor is the band theory of quantum mechanics, and the limiting factor for the radio was Hertz’s demonstration of electromagnetic waves. But for other inventions, it’s primarily technological: the turbojet had to wait not for some new physical theory, but until compressor technology and high-temperature steels appeared; likewise the airplane had to wait not for some novel theory of aerodynamics but until a light enough engine appeared. The chart below shows how often “science” or “technology” was the limiting factor for a given invention, for both inventions overall and post-1900 inventions.

In both cases, technology is the bottleneck far more often than science (though of course if you removed enough technological bottlenecks eventually you’d hit a scientific one, and vice versa).

There is of course only so much you can learn from this sort of exercise: at the end of the day, this is based on an AI’s best guess, not a thorough analysis of the various controlling factors by experts. But while I wouldn’t swear to its accuracy, I think the answers are probably mostly pretty good, and enough for us to draw some general (if tentative) conclusions about the nature of technological progress.

My main takeaway is that we mostly don’t wait all that long for new inventions. Since 1800 most inventions have appeared within a few decades of when it was possible to build them, and since 1900 these gaps been even narrower. It also seems likely that medical inventions are more likely to have long wait times than other types of inventions, and that the limiting factor for how early some new technology could appear is most likely to be technological, rather than scientific.

On the (maybe suprisingly) quick– and quickening– pace of progress: “How Long Do We Wait for New Inventions?” from @constructionphysics.skystack.xyz

* Robert Henry Thurston

###

As we analyze advance, we might send inventive birthday greetings to William Webster (W. W.) Hansen; he was born on this date in 1909. A physicist and one of the founders of the technology of microwave electronics, he had a central hand in the development of klystron technology (essential to high frequency amplification, thus central to microwave technology, radar, and UHF television transmission), and linear accelerators (he led the development of SLAC), and along with the Varian brothers and Edward Ginzton, co-founded Varian Associates (in 1948)–one of the first high-tech companies in Silicon Valley.

source

“Great inventions are never, and great discoveries are seldom, the work of any one mind. Every great invention is really an aggregation of minor inventions, or the final step of a progression. . It is not usually a creation, but a growth, as truly so as is the growth of the trees in the forest.”*…

Our old friend (and here and here) Brian Potter thinks deeply about scientific and technological advance. Here, he ponders the pace of progress…

In her book on the history of the laser, historian Joan Bromberg notes that the technological and scientific predecessors of the maser (which itself preceded the laser – two critical technologies whose developmental histories I sketched in this piece two months ago) were in place for decades before physicist Charles Townes had the insight to combine them…

… This sort of decades-long wait between when a technology first becomes possible, and when it actually appears, seems common, or at least seems like it might be common. I’ve previously written about why it took so long for wind power to be widely deployed after it became technologically possible, and people often idly speculate whether inventors in the Roman Empire could have built a steam engine, or why we waited so long to put wheels on luggage.

Knowing how long this gap between when an invention becomes possible, and when it actually appears, is useful, because it tells us something about the nature of technology and technological progress. What factors govern whether some new technology appears? How much does mere technical possibility matter, and how much do things like cross-pollination of knowledge, economic feasibility, and political factors contribute? Knowing more about how long it takes for an invention to appear once it becomes technically possible can help us answer these sorts of questions.

I wanted a better sense of how long it takes for some technology to appear once its necessary predecessors are in place. So I used AI to try and find out…

[Potter explains his method, then unpacks his results…]

We can clearly see a few trends on this graph. One is that for most inventions, the gap between when it could have been invented and when it was actually invented is not particularly large. Of the 166 inventions Claude estimated a date for, 107 of them (64%) had an “earliest plausible” date 50 years or less from the actual date, and 150 of them (90%) had an “earliest straightforward” date 50 years or less from the actual date. For more than half the inventions, the average earliest straightforward date of invention was 10 years or less from the actual date.

Conversely, there were a relatively small number of inventions where the gap between “could have been invented” and “was invented” was very large. 30 inventions (18%) had an average gap of more than 100 years between “earliest plausible” and actually invented, and eight inventions had a gap of more than 1000 years. You can see this clearly on a histogram, which shows a large bump of small time gaps, and a long tail of fewer, larger gaps.

The inventions with the longest period between “could have been invented” and “was invented” are below.

There’re a few interesting trends observable here. Many of the longest-delayed inventions — the hypodermic needle, general anaesthetic, stethoscope — are medical inventions. (You could argue the surgical mask could be in this category as well). For the hypodermic needle, this probably needed to wait until the existence of some substance that needed to be injected (such as morphine, first synthesized in 1804), but for other medical inventions this possibly also reflects folks’ reluctance to do inventive-tinkering in a medical context. For general anaesthetic, for instance, the trial and error of getting the dose right was incredibly dangerous, and the inventor Hanaoka Seishu “crippled his mother and blinded his wife perfecting the dose.”

Several of the longest-awaited inventions are ones where the version in the list is an early, impractical version of the one that actually solved a problem. So the “dandy horse” — a two-wheeled, wooden vehicle that was a predecessor of the bicycle — could have been built in antiquity, but the dandy horse wasn’t particularly practical as a means of transportation, and actually useful bicycles had to wait for the improved manufacturing technology of the later 19th century. Likewise, the version of the ballpoint pen that Claude thinks could have been invented much earlier is John Loud’s 1888 version, but Loud’s pen worked poorly and wasn’t successful. Actually useful ballpoint pens are surprisingly difficult to manufacture (China famously couldn’t manufacture them until very recently), and credit for the “useful ballpoint pen” is usually given to Lazlo Biro in 1938. (Claude correctly notes that “useful” versions of both these inventions would need to wait until much later.) Judson’s early zipper and de Martinsville’s early sound-recording device are also examples of early, not-particularly-useful inventions.

Other inventions on this list seem like they might be a case of the surrounding social or technological conditions needing to be right for the invention to appear. So Otis’ elevator safety brake needed to wait until elevators were in higher demand, which probably didn’t occur until steam engines or some other similar power source came along (though maybe you could have water-driven elevators much earlier). Barbed wire perhaps needed to wait until enclosing very large areas of land for grazing became something people needed to do.

And some inventions seem like they might have been genuinely useful had someone thought of them earlier, and simply nobody did. Blanchard’s pattern-tracing lathe, Neilson’s hot blast, and the safety pin all seem like they fall into this category, though perhaps there were good reasons these didn’t appear earlier.

Going back to the scatterplot, the other obvious trend on this chart is that the gap between when an invention becomes possible and when it appears has narrowed over time. If we graph the average and median gaps for inventions by 20-year time periods, we can see that they have fallen over time.

For the 60 post-1900 inventions, every one has a “straightforward” invention date of 50 years or less than the actual date, and 75% of them have a straightforward date of 10 years or less before the actual date. Of the 30 inventions with a gap of more than 100 years between when they could have been invented and when they actually appeared, 29 of them were invented before 1900. So the process for creating new inventions seems to be getting more and more efficient — opportunities are getting noticed and exploited sooner and sooner, up through 1970 at least (which is when the list of major inventions extends to).

We can also look at how wait times vary by type of technology. The chart below shows average wait times by different categories, for both inventions overall and for just post-1900 inventions. We can see that medical inventions have the longest wait, while electronic inventions have the shortest wait…

… We can also look at what types of factors tend to be bottlenecks. For some inventions, the bottleneck is primarily scientific: the limiting factor for the transistor is the band theory of quantum mechanics, and the limiting factor for the radio was Hertz’s demonstration of electromagnetic waves. But for other inventions, it’s primarily technological: the turbojet had to wait not for some new physical theory, but until compressor technology and high-temperature steels appeared; likewise the airplane had to wait not for some novel theory of aerodynamics but until a light enough engine appeared. The chart below shows how often “science” or “technology” was the limiting factor for a given invention, for both inventions overall and post-1900 inventions.

In both cases, technology is the bottleneck far more often than science (though of course if you removed enough technological bottlenecks eventually you’d hit a scientific one, and vice versa).

There is of course only so much you can learn from this sort of exercise: at the end of the day, this is based on an AI’s best guess, not a thorough analysis of the various controlling factors by experts. But while I wouldn’t swear to its accuracy, I think the answers are probably mostly pretty good, and enough for us to draw some general (if tentative) conclusions about the nature of technological progress.

My main takeaway is that we mostly don’t wait all that long for new inventions. Since 1800 most inventions have appeared within a few decades of when it was possible to build them, and since 1900 these gaps been even narrower. It also seems likely that medical inventions are more likely to have long wait times than other types of inventions, and that the limiting factor for how early some new technology could appear is most likely to be technological, rather than scientific.

On the (maybe suprisingly) quick– and quickening– pace of progress: “How Long Do We Wait for New Inventions?” from @constructionphysics.skystack.xyz

* Robert Henry Thurston

###

As we analyze advance, we might send inventive birthday greetings to William Webster (W. W.) Hansen; he was born on this date in 1909. A physicist and one of the founders of the technology of microwave electronics, he had a central hand in the development of klystron technology (essential to high frequency amplification, thus central to microwave technology, radar, and UHF television transmission), and linear accelerators (he led the development of SLAC), and along with the Varian brothers and Edward Ginzton, co-founded Varian Associates (in 1948)–one of the first high-tech companies in Silicon Valley.

source

“Great inventions are never, and great discoveries are seldom, the work of any one mind. Every great invention is really an aggregation of minor inventions, or the final step of a progression. . It is not usually a creation, but a growth, as truly so as is the growth of the trees in the forest.”*…

Our old friend (and here and here) Brian Potter thinks deeply about scientific and technological advance. Here, he ponders the pace of progress…

In her book on the history of the laser, historian Joan Bromberg notes that the technological and scientific predecessors of the maser (which itself preceded the laser – two critical technologies whose developmental histories I sketched in this piece two months ago) were in place for decades before physicist Charles Townes had the insight to combine them…

… This sort of decades-long wait between when a technology first becomes possible, and when it actually appears, seems common, or at least seems like it might be common. I’ve previously written about why it took so long for wind power to be widely deployed after it became technologically possible, and people often idly speculate whether inventors in the Roman Empire could have built a steam engine, or why we waited so long to put wheels on luggage.

Knowing how long this gap between when an invention becomes possible, and when it actually appears, is useful, because it tells us something about the nature of technology and technological progress. What factors govern whether some new technology appears? How much does mere technical possibility matter, and how much do things like cross-pollination of knowledge, economic feasibility, and political factors contribute? Knowing more about how long it takes for an invention to appear once it becomes technically possible can help us answer these sorts of questions.

I wanted a better sense of how long it takes for some technology to appear once its necessary predecessors are in place. So I used AI to try and find out…

[Potter explains his method, then unpacks his results…]

We can clearly see a few trends on this graph. One is that for most inventions, the gap between when it could have been invented and when it was actually invented is not particularly large. Of the 166 inventions Claude estimated a date for, 107 of them (64%) had an “earliest plausible” date 50 years or less from the actual date, and 150 of them (90%) had an “earliest straightforward” date 50 years or less from the actual date. For more than half the inventions, the average earliest straightforward date of invention was 10 years or less from the actual date.

Conversely, there were a relatively small number of inventions where the gap between “could have been invented” and “was invented” was very large. 30 inventions (18%) had an average gap of more than 100 years between “earliest plausible” and actually invented, and eight inventions had a gap of more than 1000 years. You can see this clearly on a histogram, which shows a large bump of small time gaps, and a long tail of fewer, larger gaps.

The inventions with the longest period between “could have been invented” and “was invented” are below.

There’re a few interesting trends observable here. Many of the longest-delayed inventions — the hypodermic needle, general anaesthetic, stethoscope — are medical inventions. (You could argue the surgical mask could be in this category as well). For the hypodermic needle, this probably needed to wait until the existence of some substance that needed to be injected (such as morphine, first synthesized in 1804), but for other medical inventions this possibly also reflects folks’ reluctance to do inventive-tinkering in a medical context. For general anaesthetic, for instance, the trial and error of getting the dose right was incredibly dangerous, and the inventor Hanaoka Seishu “crippled his mother and blinded his wife perfecting the dose.”

Several of the longest-awaited inventions are ones where the version in the list is an early, impractical version of the one that actually solved a problem. So the “dandy horse” — a two-wheeled, wooden vehicle that was a predecessor of the bicycle — could have been built in antiquity, but the dandy horse wasn’t particularly practical as a means of transportation, and actually useful bicycles had to wait for the improved manufacturing technology of the later 19th century. Likewise, the version of the ballpoint pen that Claude thinks could have been invented much earlier is John Loud’s 1888 version, but Loud’s pen worked poorly and wasn’t successful. Actually useful ballpoint pens are surprisingly difficult to manufacture (China famously couldn’t manufacture them until very recently), and credit for the “useful ballpoint pen” is usually given to Lazlo Biro in 1938. (Claude correctly notes that “useful” versions of both these inventions would need to wait until much later.) Judson’s early zipper and de Martinsville’s early sound-recording device are also examples of early, not-particularly-useful inventions.

Other inventions on this list seem like they might be a case of the surrounding social or technological conditions needing to be right for the invention to appear. So Otis’ elevator safety brake needed to wait until elevators were in higher demand, which probably didn’t occur until steam engines or some other similar power source came along (though maybe you could have water-driven elevators much earlier). Barbed wire perhaps needed to wait until enclosing very large areas of land for grazing became something people needed to do.

And some inventions seem like they might have been genuinely useful had someone thought of them earlier, and simply nobody did. Blanchard’s pattern-tracing lathe, Neilson’s hot blast, and the safety pin all seem like they fall into this category, though perhaps there were good reasons these didn’t appear earlier.

Going back to the scatterplot, the other obvious trend on this chart is that the gap between when an invention becomes possible and when it appears has narrowed over time. If we graph the average and median gaps for inventions by 20-year time periods, we can see that they have fallen over time.

For the 60 post-1900 inventions, every one has a “straightforward” invention date of 50 years or less than the actual date, and 75% of them have a straightforward date of 10 years or less before the actual date. Of the 30 inventions with a gap of more than 100 years between when they could have been invented and when they actually appeared, 29 of them were invented before 1900. So the process for creating new inventions seems to be getting more and more efficient — opportunities are getting noticed and exploited sooner and sooner, up through 1970 at least (which is when the list of major inventions extends to).

We can also look at how wait times vary by type of technology. The chart below shows average wait times by different categories, for both inventions overall and for just post-1900 inventions. We can see that medical inventions have the longest wait, while electronic inventions have the shortest wait…

… We can also look at what types of factors tend to be bottlenecks. For some inventions, the bottleneck is primarily scientific: the limiting factor for the transistor is the band theory of quantum mechanics, and the limiting factor for the radio was Hertz’s demonstration of electromagnetic waves. But for other inventions, it’s primarily technological: the turbojet had to wait not for some new physical theory, but until compressor technology and high-temperature steels appeared; likewise the airplane had to wait not for some novel theory of aerodynamics but until a light enough engine appeared. The chart below shows how often “science” or “technology” was the limiting factor for a given invention, for both inventions overall and post-1900 inventions.

In both cases, technology is the bottleneck far more often than science (though of course if you removed enough technological bottlenecks eventually you’d hit a scientific one, and vice versa).

There is of course only so much you can learn from this sort of exercise: at the end of the day, this is based on an AI’s best guess, not a thorough analysis of the various controlling factors by experts. But while I wouldn’t swear to its accuracy, I think the answers are probably mostly pretty good, and enough for us to draw some general (if tentative) conclusions about the nature of technological progress.

My main takeaway is that we mostly don’t wait all that long for new inventions. Since 1800 most inventions have appeared within a few decades of when it was possible to build them, and since 1900 these gaps been even narrower. It also seems likely that medical inventions are more likely to have long wait times than other types of inventions, and that the limiting factor for how early some new technology could appear is most likely to be technological, rather than scientific.

On the (maybe suprisingly) quick– and quickening– pace of progress: “How Long Do We Wait for New Inventions?” from @constructionphysics.skystack.xyz

* Robert Henry Thurston

###

As we analyze advance, we might send inventive birthday greetings to William Webster (W. W.) Hansen; he was born on this date in 1909. A physicist and one of the founders of the technology of microwave electronics, he had a central hand in the development of klystron technology (essential to high frequency amplification, thus central to microwave technology, radar, and UHF television transmission), and linear accelerators (he led the development of SLAC), and along with the Varian brothers and Edward Ginzton, co-founded Varian Associates (in 1948)–one of the first high-tech companies in Silicon Valley.

source

“Great inventions are never, and great discoveries are seldom, the work of any one mind. Every great invention is really an aggregation of minor inventions, or the final step of a progression. . It is not usually a creation, but a growth, as truly so as is the growth of the trees in the forest.”*…

Our old friend (and here and here) Brian Potter thinks deeply about scientific and technological advance. Here, he ponders the pace of progress…

In her book on the history of the laser, historian Joan Bromberg notes that the technological and scientific predecessors of the maser (which itself preceded the laser – two critical technologies whose developmental histories I sketched in this piece two months ago) were in place for decades before physicist Charles Townes had the insight to combine them…

… This sort of decades-long wait between when a technology first becomes possible, and when it actually appears, seems common, or at least seems like it might be common. I’ve previously written about why it took so long for wind power to be widely deployed after it became technologically possible, and people often idly speculate whether inventors in the Roman Empire could have built a steam engine, or why we waited so long to put wheels on luggage.

Knowing how long this gap between when an invention becomes possible, and when it actually appears, is useful, because it tells us something about the nature of technology and technological progress. What factors govern whether some new technology appears? How much does mere technical possibility matter, and how much do things like cross-pollination of knowledge, economic feasibility, and political factors contribute? Knowing more about how long it takes for an invention to appear once it becomes technically possible can help us answer these sorts of questions.

I wanted a better sense of how long it takes for some technology to appear once its necessary predecessors are in place. So I used AI to try and find out…

[Potter explains his method, then unpacks his results…]

We can clearly see a few trends on this graph. One is that for most inventions, the gap between when it could have been invented and when it was actually invented is not particularly large. Of the 166 inventions Claude estimated a date for, 107 of them (64%) had an “earliest plausible” date 50 years or less from the actual date, and 150 of them (90%) had an “earliest straightforward” date 50 years or less from the actual date. For more than half the inventions, the average earliest straightforward date of invention was 10 years or less from the actual date.

Conversely, there were a relatively small number of inventions where the gap between “could have been invented” and “was invented” was very large. 30 inventions (18%) had an average gap of more than 100 years between “earliest plausible” and actually invented, and eight inventions had a gap of more than 1000 years. You can see this clearly on a histogram, which shows a large bump of small time gaps, and a long tail of fewer, larger gaps.

The inventions with the longest period between “could have been invented” and “was invented” are below.

There’re a few interesting trends observable here. Many of the longest-delayed inventions — the hypodermic needle, general anaesthetic, stethoscope — are medical inventions. (You could argue the surgical mask could be in this category as well). For the hypodermic needle, this probably needed to wait until the existence of some substance that needed to be injected (such as morphine, first synthesized in 1804), but for other medical inventions this possibly also reflects folks’ reluctance to do inventive-tinkering in a medical context. For general anaesthetic, for instance, the trial and error of getting the dose right was incredibly dangerous, and the inventor Hanaoka Seishu “crippled his mother and blinded his wife perfecting the dose.”

Several of the longest-awaited inventions are ones where the version in the list is an early, impractical version of the one that actually solved a problem. So the “dandy horse” — a two-wheeled, wooden vehicle that was a predecessor of the bicycle — could have been built in antiquity, but the dandy horse wasn’t particularly practical as a means of transportation, and actually useful bicycles had to wait for the improved manufacturing technology of the later 19th century. Likewise, the version of the ballpoint pen that Claude thinks could have been invented much earlier is John Loud’s 1888 version, but Loud’s pen worked poorly and wasn’t successful. Actually useful ballpoint pens are surprisingly difficult to manufacture (China famously couldn’t manufacture them until very recently), and credit for the “useful ballpoint pen” is usually given to Lazlo Biro in 1938. (Claude correctly notes that “useful” versions of both these inventions would need to wait until much later.) Judson’s early zipper and de Martinsville’s early sound-recording device are also examples of early, not-particularly-useful inventions.

Other inventions on this list seem like they might be a case of the surrounding social or technological conditions needing to be right for the invention to appear. So Otis’ elevator safety brake needed to wait until elevators were in higher demand, which probably didn’t occur until steam engines or some other similar power source came along (though maybe you could have water-driven elevators much earlier). Barbed wire perhaps needed to wait until enclosing very large areas of land for grazing became something people needed to do.

And some inventions seem like they might have been genuinely useful had someone thought of them earlier, and simply nobody did. Blanchard’s pattern-tracing lathe, Neilson’s hot blast, and the safety pin all seem like they fall into this category, though perhaps there were good reasons these didn’t appear earlier.

Going back to the scatterplot, the other obvious trend on this chart is that the gap between when an invention becomes possible and when it appears has narrowed over time. If we graph the average and median gaps for inventions by 20-year time periods, we can see that they have fallen over time.

For the 60 post-1900 inventions, every one has a “straightforward” invention date of 50 years or less than the actual date, and 75% of them have a straightforward date of 10 years or less before the actual date. Of the 30 inventions with a gap of more than 100 years between when they could have been invented and when they actually appeared, 29 of them were invented before 1900. So the process for creating new inventions seems to be getting more and more efficient — opportunities are getting noticed and exploited sooner and sooner, up through 1970 at least (which is when the list of major inventions extends to).

We can also look at how wait times vary by type of technology. The chart below shows average wait times by different categories, for both inventions overall and for just post-1900 inventions. We can see that medical inventions have the longest wait, while electronic inventions have the shortest wait…

… We can also look at what types of factors tend to be bottlenecks. For some inventions, the bottleneck is primarily scientific: the limiting factor for the transistor is the band theory of quantum mechanics, and the limiting factor for the radio was Hertz’s demonstration of electromagnetic waves. But for other inventions, it’s primarily technological: the turbojet had to wait not for some new physical theory, but until compressor technology and high-temperature steels appeared; likewise the airplane had to wait not for some novel theory of aerodynamics but until a light enough engine appeared. The chart below shows how often “science” or “technology” was the limiting factor for a given invention, for both inventions overall and post-1900 inventions.

In both cases, technology is the bottleneck far more often than science (though of course if you removed enough technological bottlenecks eventually you’d hit a scientific one, and vice versa).

There is of course only so much you can learn from this sort of exercise: at the end of the day, this is based on an AI’s best guess, not a thorough analysis of the various controlling factors by experts. But while I wouldn’t swear to its accuracy, I think the answers are probably mostly pretty good, and enough for us to draw some general (if tentative) conclusions about the nature of technological progress.

My main takeaway is that we mostly don’t wait all that long for new inventions. Since 1800 most inventions have appeared within a few decades of when it was possible to build them, and since 1900 these gaps been even narrower. It also seems likely that medical inventions are more likely to have long wait times than other types of inventions, and that the limiting factor for how early some new technology could appear is most likely to be technological, rather than scientific.

On the (maybe suprisingly) quick– and quickening– pace of progress: “How Long Do We Wait for New Inventions?” from @constructionphysics.skystack.xyz

* Robert Henry Thurston

###

As we analyze advance, we might send inventive birthday greetings to William Webster (W. W.) Hansen; he was born on this date in 1909. A physicist and one of the founders of the technology of microwave electronics, he had a central hand in the development of klystron technology (essential to high frequency amplification, thus central to microwave technology, radar, and UHF television transmission), and linear accelerators (he led the development of SLAC), and along with the Varian brothers and Edward Ginzton, co-founded Varian Associates (in 1948)–one of the first high-tech companies in Silicon Valley.

source

https://www.europesays.com/people/85178/ Could anything but profit steer AI? The OpenAI trial offered clues but no verdict #ComputerNews #HiTechNews #hitech #InformationTechnology #Innovation #inventions #SamAltman

@mmzpotsdam @tazgetroete #samsonschule #wolfenbuettel #grammophon #musik #EmilBerliner #innovation #inventions #music #hismastersvoice #technik #erinnerung Heute anlässlich des 175. Geburtstags von Emil(e) Berliner wurde ein Fest- und Gedenkakt in der Samsonschule zu Wolfenbüttel im Emil-Berliner-Saal abgehalten.

@mmzpotsdam @tazgetroete #samsonschule #wolfenbuettel #grammophon #musik #EmilBerliner #innovation #inventions #music #hismastersvoice #technik #erinnerung Heute anlässlich des 175. Geburtstags von Emil(e) Berliner wurde ein Fest- und Gedenkakt in der Samsonschule zu Wolfenbüttel im Emil-Berliner-Saal abgehalten.

💁🏻‍♀️ ICYMI: 🏛️🧱 Before #Rome became an empire that ruled on three continents, it was a small Italian city-state surrounded by a thriving yet often uncredited civilization known as the Etruscans.

These #ancient Italians were industrious artists and skilled engineers who built great roads, #bridges, and underground #water tunnels. They laid the foundation for present-day #architecture, engineering, and artistic achievements, establishing technologies like winemaking and hydraulic systems in Italy from around 900 to 100 BCE.

👉 Learn more: https://seethis.tv/post/who-were-the-etruscans

#history #animation #anthropology #archaeology #art #museums #books #culture #egypt #europe #inventions #italy #languages #mediterranian #mummy #statue #tksst #video

💁🏻‍♀️ ICYMI: 🏛️🧱 Before #Rome became an empire that ruled on three continents, it was a small Italian city-state surrounded by a thriving yet often uncredited civilization known as the Etruscans.

These #ancient Italians were industrious artists and skilled engineers who built great roads, #bridges, and underground #water tunnels. They laid the foundation for present-day #architecture, engineering, and artistic achievements, establishing technologies like winemaking and hydraulic systems in Italy from around 900 to 100 BCE.

👉 Learn more: https://seethis.tv/post/who-were-the-etruscans

#history #animation #anthropology #archaeology #art #museums #books #culture #egypt #europe #inventions #italy #languages #mediterranian #mummy #statue #tksst #video

💁🏻‍♀️ ICYMI: 🏛️🧱 Before #Rome became an empire that ruled on three continents, it was a small Italian city-state surrounded by a thriving yet often uncredited civilization known as the Etruscans.

These #ancient Italians were industrious artists and skilled engineers who built great roads, #bridges, and underground #water tunnels. They laid the foundation for present-day #architecture, engineering, and artistic achievements, establishing technologies like winemaking and hydraulic systems in Italy from around 900 to 100 BCE.

👉 Learn more: https://seethis.tv/post/who-were-the-etruscans

#history #animation #anthropology #archaeology #art #museums #books #culture #egypt #europe #inventions #italy #languages #mediterranian #mummy #statue #tksst #video

💁🏻‍♀️ ICYMI: 🏛️🧱 Before #Rome became an empire that ruled on three continents, it was a small Italian city-state surrounded by a thriving yet often uncredited civilization known as the Etruscans.

These #ancient Italians were industrious artists and skilled engineers who built great roads, #bridges, and underground #water tunnels. They laid the foundation for present-day #architecture, engineering, and artistic achievements, establishing technologies like winemaking and hydraulic systems in Italy from around 900 to 100 BCE.

👉 Learn more: https://seethis.tv/post/who-were-the-etruscans

#history #animation #anthropology #archaeology #art #museums #books #culture #egypt #europe #inventions #italy #languages #mediterranian #mummy #statue #tksst #video

💁🏻‍♀️ ICYMI: 🏛️🧱 Before #Rome became an empire that ruled on three continents, it was a small Italian city-state surrounded by a thriving yet often uncredited civilization known as the Etruscans.

These #ancient Italians were industrious artists and skilled engineers who built great roads, #bridges, and underground #water tunnels. They laid the foundation for present-day #architecture, engineering, and artistic achievements, establishing technologies like winemaking and hydraulic systems in Italy from around 900 to 100 BCE.

👉 Learn more: https://seethis.tv/post/who-were-the-etruscans

#history #animation #anthropology #archaeology #art #museums #books #culture #egypt #europe #inventions #italy #languages #mediterranian #mummy #statue #tksst #video

🏛️🧱 Before #Rome became an empire that ruled on three continents, it was a small Italian city-state surrounded by a thriving yet often uncredited civilization known as the Etruscans.

These #ancient Italians were industrious artists and skilled engineers who built great roads, #bridges, and underground #water tunnels. They laid the foundation for present-day #architecture, engineering, and artistic achievements, establishing technologies like winemaking and hydraulic systems in Italy from around 900 to 100 BCE.

👉 Learn more: https://seethis.tv/post/who-were-the-etruscans

#history #animation #anthropology #archaeology #art #museums #books #culture #egypt #europe #inventions #italy #languages #mediterranian #mummy #statue #tksst #video

🏛️🧱 Before #Rome became an empire that ruled on three continents, it was a small Italian city-state surrounded by a thriving yet often uncredited civilization known as the Etruscans.

These #ancient Italians were industrious artists and skilled engineers who built great roads, #bridges, and underground #water tunnels. They laid the foundation for present-day #architecture, engineering, and artistic achievements, establishing technologies like winemaking and hydraulic systems in Italy from around 900 to 100 BCE.

👉 Learn more: https://seethis.tv/post/who-were-the-etruscans

#history #animation #anthropology #archaeology #art #museums #books #culture #egypt #europe #inventions #italy #languages #mediterranian #mummy #statue #tksst #video

🏛️🧱 Before #Rome became an empire that ruled on three continents, it was a small Italian city-state surrounded by a thriving yet often uncredited civilization known as the Etruscans.

These #ancient Italians were industrious artists and skilled engineers who built great roads, #bridges, and underground #water tunnels. They laid the foundation for present-day #architecture, engineering, and artistic achievements, establishing technologies like winemaking and hydraulic systems in Italy from around 900 to 100 BCE.

👉 Learn more: https://seethis.tv/post/who-were-the-etruscans

#history #animation #anthropology #archaeology #art #museums #books #culture #egypt #europe #inventions #italy #languages #mediterranian #mummy #statue #tksst #video

🏛️🧱 Before #Rome became an empire that ruled on three continents, it was a small Italian city-state surrounded by a thriving yet often uncredited civilization known as the Etruscans.

These #ancient Italians were industrious artists and skilled engineers who built great roads, #bridges, and underground #water tunnels. They laid the foundation for present-day #architecture, engineering, and artistic achievements, establishing technologies like winemaking and hydraulic systems in Italy from around 900 to 100 BCE.

👉 Learn more: https://seethis.tv/post/who-were-the-etruscans

#history #animation #anthropology #archaeology #art #museums #books #culture #egypt #europe #inventions #italy #languages #mediterranian #mummy #statue #tksst #video

🏛️🧱 Before #Rome became an empire that ruled on three continents, it was a small Italian city-state surrounded by a thriving yet often uncredited civilization known as the Etruscans.

These #ancient Italians were industrious artists and skilled engineers who built great roads, #bridges, and underground #water tunnels. They laid the foundation for present-day #architecture, engineering, and artistic achievements, establishing technologies like winemaking and hydraulic systems in Italy from around 900 to 100 BCE.

👉 Learn more: https://seethis.tv/post/who-were-the-etruscans

#history #animation #anthropology #archaeology #art #museums #books #culture #egypt #europe #inventions #italy #languages #mediterranian #mummy #statue #tksst #video

EU rules could make fossil-free aviation fuels unnecessarily expensive and energy-intensive, study indicates

EU regulations risk leading to inefficient use of biomass for production of sustainable aviation fuel, according to a…
#Europe #EU #computernews #EuropeanUnion #hi-technews #hitech #informationtechnology #innovation #inventions
https://www.europesays.com/europe/42319/

EU court sides with Italy over publishers’ rights vs Meta

Credit: Unsplash/CC0 Public Domain The European Court of Justice sided Tuesday with Italy against technology giant Meta in…
#Italy #Europe #Europa #EU #computernews #hi-technews #hitech #informationtechnology #Innovation #inventions
https://www.europesays.com/italy/15223/

Taiwanese inventions win 11 gold medals at Paris competition

By Sam Garcia / Staff writer, with CNA Taiwanese innovations won 11 gold medals at the 125th edition…
#France #FR #Europe #EU #Paris #internationalcompetition #inventions #SamGarcia #TheTaipeiTimes #台北時報
https://www.europesays.com/france/13747/

European minnows bid to challenge social media giants

A new crop of European social media apps want to find room in a crowded market dominated by…
#Europe #EU #computernews #European #hi-technews #hitech #informationtechnology #innovation #inventions
https://www.europesays.com/europe/36867/

Five Amazing Inventions From the Ancient Sumerians That Honestly Weren’t as Impressive as the N64 Rumble Pak

https://web.brid.gy/r/https://hard-drive.net/five-amazing-inventions-from-the-ancient-sumerians-that-honestly-werent-as-impressive-as-the-n64-rumble-pak/

Five Amazing Inventions From the Ancient Sumerians That Honestly Weren’t as Impressive as the N64 Rumble Pak

https://web.brid.gy/r/https://hard-drive.net/five-amazing-inventions-from-the-ancient-sumerians-that-honestly-werent-as-impressive-as-the-n64-rumble-pak/

Five Amazing Inventions From the Ancient Sumerians That Honestly Weren’t as Impressive as the N64 Rumble Pak

https://web.brid.gy/r/https://hard-drive.net/five-amazing-inventions-from-the-ancient-sumerians-that-honestly-werent-as-impressive-as-the-n64-rumble-pak/

Five Amazing Inventions From the Ancient Sumerians That Honestly Weren’t as Impressive as the N64 Rumble Pak

https://web.brid.gy/r/https://hard-drive.net/five-amazing-inventions-from-the-ancient-sumerians-that-honestly-werent-as-impressive-as-the-n64-rumble-pak/

Five Amazing Inventions From the Ancient Sumerians That Honestly Weren’t as Impressive as the N64 Rumble Pak

https://web.brid.gy/r/https://hard-drive.net/five-amazing-inventions-from-the-ancient-sumerians-that-honestly-werent-as-impressive-as-the-n64-rumble-pak/

Those pesky printers!
--- --- ---
Dieser vermaledeite Drucker!

#KätToon #Drucker #Printer #Satire #Inventions

Those pesky printers!
--- --- ---
Dieser vermaledeite Drucker!

#KätToon #Drucker #Printer #Satire #Inventions

The Quiet Genius Behind the Screw in Your Wall

Dear Cherubs, you probably haven’t heard of Artur Fischer, but your walls definitely have. If modern life had a backstage crew, he’d be running the entire show with a toolbox and a suspicious number of patents.

NOT ALL HEROES WEAR CAPES

Fischer’s most famous invention is the nylon wall plug, patented in 1958. It sounds underwhelming until you realize it solved a universal headache: how to hang things on walls without everything crashing down five minutes later. According to the German Patent and Trade Mark Office, this small plastic insert expands inside a drilled hole, gripping screws firmly in materials like brick or concrete. Translation: your shelves, TVs, and questionable DIY projects owe him everything.

Before this, attaching anything to a wall was basically a gamble. Fischer’s plug turned guesswork into engineering. It’s now so standard that most people don’t even think about it—like Wi-Fi or gravity, just assumed to work.

But he didn’t stop there. He also developed chemical anchoring systems, which sound like something from a sci-fi film but are actually used in heavy-duty construction. These systems use resin to secure bolts in place, making them essential for bridges, tunnels, and structures where “falling apart” isn’t an option. As reported by engineering sources, these anchors can handle extreme loads and are still widely used today.

FLASH, BUT MAKE IT PRECISE

Before conquering the construction world, Fischer made a name in photography. In 1949, he patented a flash synchronization system that ensured a camera’s flash fired at exactly the right moment when the shutter opened. According to historical records from Leica Camera, this innovation dramatically improved low-light photography. No more half-lit faces or ghostly blurs—just properly timed, crisp images.

It’s one of those inventions that quietly became essential. Every modern camera system owes a nod to that precise timing breakthrough, even if no one’s sending thank-you notes.

Fischer also ventured into education with fischertechnik, a line of construction kits designed to teach engineering concepts. Think Lego, but with a stronger focus on mechanics, physics, and future careers. These kits are still used in schools, helping kids build everything from simple machines to robotic systems.

What makes Fischer interesting isn’t just the volume of his patents—often cited as over 1,100 according to multiple sources—but the practicality of them. He didn’t chase flashy ideas; he fixed everyday problems. The kind you only notice when they go wrong.

Low-key, that’s the real flex. While others were dreaming big, Fischer made sure your shelf stayed on the wall.

For more deep dives into clever inventions and overlooked innovators, you can explore thisclaimer.com or check out the YouTube channel Thisclaimer for additional insights and breakdowns.

Sources list:
German Patent and Trade Mark Office — https://www.dpma.de/english/our_office/publications/milestones/arturfischer/index.html
Encyclopaedia Britannica — https://www.britannica.com/biography/Artur-Fischer
Leica Camera History — https://www.leica-camera.com/en-int/Leica-History
thisclaimer.com — https://thisclaimer.com
YouTube Thisclaimer — https://www.youtube.com/@thisclaimer?sub_confirmation=1

The Quiet Genius Behind the Screw in Your Wall

Dear Cherubs, you probably haven’t heard of Artur Fischer, but your walls definitely have. If modern life had a backstage crew, he’d be running the entire show with a toolbox and a suspicious number of patents.

NOT ALL HEROES WEAR CAPES

Fischer’s most famous invention is the nylon wall plug, patented in 1958. It sounds underwhelming until you realize it solved a universal headache: how to hang things on walls without everything crashing down five minutes later. According to the German Patent and Trade Mark Office, this small plastic insert expands inside a drilled hole, gripping screws firmly in materials like brick or concrete. Translation: your shelves, TVs, and questionable DIY projects owe him everything.

Before this, attaching anything to a wall was basically a gamble. Fischer’s plug turned guesswork into engineering. It’s now so standard that most people don’t even think about it—like Wi-Fi or gravity, just assumed to work.

But he didn’t stop there. He also developed chemical anchoring systems, which sound like something from a sci-fi film but are actually used in heavy-duty construction. These systems use resin to secure bolts in place, making them essential for bridges, tunnels, and structures where “falling apart” isn’t an option. As reported by engineering sources, these anchors can handle extreme loads and are still widely used today.

FLASH, BUT MAKE IT PRECISE

Before conquering the construction world, Fischer made a name in photography. In 1949, he patented a flash synchronization system that ensured a camera’s flash fired at exactly the right moment when the shutter opened. According to historical records from Leica Camera, this innovation dramatically improved low-light photography. No more half-lit faces or ghostly blurs—just properly timed, crisp images.

It’s one of those inventions that quietly became essential. Every modern camera system owes a nod to that precise timing breakthrough, even if no one’s sending thank-you notes.

Fischer also ventured into education with fischertechnik, a line of construction kits designed to teach engineering concepts. Think Lego, but with a stronger focus on mechanics, physics, and future careers. These kits are still used in schools, helping kids build everything from simple machines to robotic systems.

What makes Fischer interesting isn’t just the volume of his patents—often cited as over 1,100 according to multiple sources—but the practicality of them. He didn’t chase flashy ideas; he fixed everyday problems. The kind you only notice when they go wrong.

Low-key, that’s the real flex. While others were dreaming big, Fischer made sure your shelf stayed on the wall.

For more deep dives into clever inventions and overlooked innovators, you can explore thisclaimer.com or check out the YouTube channel Thisclaimer for additional insights and breakdowns.

Sources list:
German Patent and Trade Mark Office — https://www.dpma.de/english/our_office/publications/milestones/arturfischer/index.html
Encyclopaedia Britannica — https://www.britannica.com/biography/Artur-Fischer
Leica Camera History — https://www.leica-camera.com/en-int/Leica-History
thisclaimer.com — https://thisclaimer.com
YouTube Thisclaimer — https://www.youtube.com/@thisclaimer?sub_confirmation=1

The Quiet Genius Behind the Screw in Your Wall

Dear Cherubs, you probably haven’t heard of Artur Fischer, but your walls definitely have. If modern life had a backstage crew, he’d be running the entire show with a toolbox and a suspicious number of patents.

NOT ALL HEROES WEAR CAPES

Fischer’s most famous invention is the nylon wall plug, patented in 1958. It sounds underwhelming until you realize it solved a universal headache: how to hang things on walls without everything crashing down five minutes later. According to the German Patent and Trade Mark Office, this small plastic insert expands inside a drilled hole, gripping screws firmly in materials like brick or concrete. Translation: your shelves, TVs, and questionable DIY projects owe him everything.

Before this, attaching anything to a wall was basically a gamble. Fischer’s plug turned guesswork into engineering. It’s now so standard that most people don’t even think about it—like Wi-Fi or gravity, just assumed to work.

But he didn’t stop there. He also developed chemical anchoring systems, which sound like something from a sci-fi film but are actually used in heavy-duty construction. These systems use resin to secure bolts in place, making them essential for bridges, tunnels, and structures where “falling apart” isn’t an option. As reported by engineering sources, these anchors can handle extreme loads and are still widely used today.

FLASH, BUT MAKE IT PRECISE

Before conquering the construction world, Fischer made a name in photography. In 1949, he patented a flash synchronization system that ensured a camera’s flash fired at exactly the right moment when the shutter opened. According to historical records from Leica Camera, this innovation dramatically improved low-light photography. No more half-lit faces or ghostly blurs—just properly timed, crisp images.

It’s one of those inventions that quietly became essential. Every modern camera system owes a nod to that precise timing breakthrough, even if no one’s sending thank-you notes.

Fischer also ventured into education with fischertechnik, a line of construction kits designed to teach engineering concepts. Think Lego, but with a stronger focus on mechanics, physics, and future careers. These kits are still used in schools, helping kids build everything from simple machines to robotic systems.

What makes Fischer interesting isn’t just the volume of his patents—often cited as over 1,100 according to multiple sources—but the practicality of them. He didn’t chase flashy ideas; he fixed everyday problems. The kind you only notice when they go wrong.

Low-key, that’s the real flex. While others were dreaming big, Fischer made sure your shelf stayed on the wall.

For more deep dives into clever inventions and overlooked innovators, you can explore thisclaimer.com or check out the YouTube channel Thisclaimer for additional insights and breakdowns.

Sources list:
German Patent and Trade Mark Office — https://www.dpma.de/english/our_office/publications/milestones/arturfischer/index.html
Encyclopaedia Britannica — https://www.britannica.com/biography/Artur-Fischer
Leica Camera History — https://www.leica-camera.com/en-int/Leica-History
thisclaimer.com — https://thisclaimer.com
YouTube Thisclaimer — https://www.youtube.com/@thisclaimer?sub_confirmation=1

The Quiet Genius Behind the Screw in Your Wall

Dear Cherubs, you probably haven’t heard of Artur Fischer, but your walls definitely have. If modern life had a backstage crew, he’d be running the entire show with a toolbox and a suspicious number of patents.

NOT ALL HEROES WEAR CAPES

Fischer’s most famous invention is the nylon wall plug, patented in 1958. It sounds underwhelming until you realize it solved a universal headache: how to hang things on walls without everything crashing down five minutes later. According to the German Patent and Trade Mark Office, this small plastic insert expands inside a drilled hole, gripping screws firmly in materials like brick or concrete. Translation: your shelves, TVs, and questionable DIY projects owe him everything.

Before this, attaching anything to a wall was basically a gamble. Fischer’s plug turned guesswork into engineering. It’s now so standard that most people don’t even think about it—like Wi-Fi or gravity, just assumed to work.

But he didn’t stop there. He also developed chemical anchoring systems, which sound like something from a sci-fi film but are actually used in heavy-duty construction. These systems use resin to secure bolts in place, making them essential for bridges, tunnels, and structures where “falling apart” isn’t an option. As reported by engineering sources, these anchors can handle extreme loads and are still widely used today.

FLASH, BUT MAKE IT PRECISE

Before conquering the construction world, Fischer made a name in photography. In 1949, he patented a flash synchronization system that ensured a camera’s flash fired at exactly the right moment when the shutter opened. According to historical records from Leica Camera, this innovation dramatically improved low-light photography. No more half-lit faces or ghostly blurs—just properly timed, crisp images.

It’s one of those inventions that quietly became essential. Every modern camera system owes a nod to that precise timing breakthrough, even if no one’s sending thank-you notes.

Fischer also ventured into education with fischertechnik, a line of construction kits designed to teach engineering concepts. Think Lego, but with a stronger focus on mechanics, physics, and future careers. These kits are still used in schools, helping kids build everything from simple machines to robotic systems.

What makes Fischer interesting isn’t just the volume of his patents—often cited as over 1,100 according to multiple sources—but the practicality of them. He didn’t chase flashy ideas; he fixed everyday problems. The kind you only notice when they go wrong.

Low-key, that’s the real flex. While others were dreaming big, Fischer made sure your shelf stayed on the wall.

For more deep dives into clever inventions and overlooked innovators, you can explore thisclaimer.com or check out the YouTube channel Thisclaimer for additional insights and breakdowns.

Sources list:
German Patent and Trade Mark Office — https://www.dpma.de/english/our_office/publications/milestones/arturfischer/index.html
Encyclopaedia Britannica — https://www.britannica.com/biography/Artur-Fischer
Leica Camera History — https://www.leica-camera.com/en-int/Leica-History
thisclaimer.com — https://thisclaimer.com
YouTube Thisclaimer — https://www.youtube.com/@thisclaimer?sub_confirmation=1

The Quiet Genius Behind the Screw in Your Wall

Dear Cherubs, you probably haven’t heard of Artur Fischer, but your walls definitely have. If modern life had a backstage crew, he’d be running the entire show with a toolbox and a suspicious number of patents.

NOT ALL HEROES WEAR CAPES

Fischer’s most famous invention is the nylon wall plug, patented in 1958. It sounds underwhelming until you realize it solved a universal headache: how to hang things on walls without everything crashing down five minutes later. According to the German Patent and Trade Mark Office, this small plastic insert expands inside a drilled hole, gripping screws firmly in materials like brick or concrete. Translation: your shelves, TVs, and questionable DIY projects owe him everything.

Before this, attaching anything to a wall was basically a gamble. Fischer’s plug turned guesswork into engineering. It’s now so standard that most people don’t even think about it—like Wi-Fi or gravity, just assumed to work.

But he didn’t stop there. He also developed chemical anchoring systems, which sound like something from a sci-fi film but are actually used in heavy-duty construction. These systems use resin to secure bolts in place, making them essential for bridges, tunnels, and structures where “falling apart” isn’t an option. As reported by engineering sources, these anchors can handle extreme loads and are still widely used today.

FLASH, BUT MAKE IT PRECISE

Before conquering the construction world, Fischer made a name in photography. In 1949, he patented a flash synchronization system that ensured a camera’s flash fired at exactly the right moment when the shutter opened. According to historical records from Leica Camera, this innovation dramatically improved low-light photography. No more half-lit faces or ghostly blurs—just properly timed, crisp images.

It’s one of those inventions that quietly became essential. Every modern camera system owes a nod to that precise timing breakthrough, even if no one’s sending thank-you notes.

Fischer also ventured into education with fischertechnik, a line of construction kits designed to teach engineering concepts. Think Lego, but with a stronger focus on mechanics, physics, and future careers. These kits are still used in schools, helping kids build everything from simple machines to robotic systems.

What makes Fischer interesting isn’t just the volume of his patents—often cited as over 1,100 according to multiple sources—but the practicality of them. He didn’t chase flashy ideas; he fixed everyday problems. The kind you only notice when they go wrong.

Low-key, that’s the real flex. While others were dreaming big, Fischer made sure your shelf stayed on the wall.

For more deep dives into clever inventions and overlooked innovators, you can explore thisclaimer.com or check out the YouTube channel Thisclaimer for additional insights and breakdowns.

Sources list:
German Patent and Trade Mark Office — https://www.dpma.de/english/our_office/publications/milestones/arturfischer/index.html
Encyclopaedia Britannica — https://www.britannica.com/biography/Artur-Fischer
Leica Camera History — https://www.leica-camera.com/en-int/Leica-History
thisclaimer.com — https://thisclaimer.com
YouTube Thisclaimer — https://www.youtube.com/@thisclaimer?sub_confirmation=1

https://www.europesays.com/people/53712/ Pentagon signs classified AI deals with tech giants, snubs Anthropic #ComputerNews #DarioAmodei #HiTechNews #hitech #InformationTechnology #Innovation #inventions

‘Tipping point’ to electric vehicles reached in Europe and China

Credit: CC0 Public Domain Electric vehicle sales in China and Europe have reached a threshold or “tipping point”…
#Europe #EU #computernews #European #hi-technews #hitech #informationtechnology #innovation #inventions
https://www.europesays.com/europe/28446/

@dereel @plyspomitox
You may enjoy: https://www.halfbakery.com/

#ideas #inventions #innovation

EU tells Google to open Android to AI rivals

The European Commission wants consumers to be able to try more than just Gemini — Google’s AI app…
#Europe #EU #computernews #EuropeanUnion #hi-technews #hitech #informationtechnology #innovation #inventions
https://www.europesays.com/europe/24491/

https://www.europesays.com/britain/23400/ EV drivers’ habits uncover why Britain needs region-specific public charging plans #Britain #ComputerNews #HiTechNews #hitech #InformationTechnology #innovation #inventions

The Snowmobile: A Canadian Winter Essential

Quebec inventor Joseph-Armand Bombardier built the first snowmobile in 1935, revolutionizing winter travel in rural Canada. His company, Bombardier, later became a global leader in transportation. ❄️

🇨🇦 #Canada #Inventions #WinterTech

https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/joseph-armand-bombardier

Germany launches spying probe into Signal attacks targeting MPs

German parliament speaker Julia Kloeckner was targeted in a Signal phishing attack, according to reports. German prosecutors Friday…
#Germany #DE #Europe #EU #Europa #computernews #hi-technews #hitech #Informationtechnology #innovation #inventions
https://www.europesays.com/germany/7381/

Game over: Players press EU to ban ‘destroying’ video titles

More than a million people from across Europe have backed a citizens’ petition to stop publishers from dropping…
#Europe #EU #computernews #EuropeanUnion #hi-technews #hitech #informationtechnology #innovation #inventions
https://www.europesays.com/europe/16898/

EU spells out how Google must share data with rivals

Credit: cottonbro studio from Pexels The European Commission set out Thursday how it wants Google to make a…
#Europe #EU #EuropeanCommission #computernews #hi-technews #hitech #informationtechnology #innovation #inventions
https://www.europesays.com/europe/15474/

10 forgotten #inventions that could have changed the world: Why they disappeared
Forgotten inventions like #water‑powered #cars, #Tesla’s wireless #energy, and the EV1 could
#ForgottenInventions #LostTechnology #InnovationHistory #Tesla #EV1 #Starlite
https://juskosave.blogspot.com/2026/04/10-forgotten-inventions-that-could-have.html

10 forgotten #inventions that could have changed the world: Why they disappeared
Forgotten inventions like #water‑powered #cars, #Tesla’s wireless #energy, and the EV1 could
#ForgottenInventions #LostTechnology #InnovationHistory #Tesla #EV1 #Starlite
https://juskosave.blogspot.com/2026/04/10-forgotten-inventions-that-could-have.html

10 forgotten #inventions that could have changed the world: Why they disappeared
Forgotten inventions like #water‑powered #cars, #Tesla’s wireless #energy, and the EV1 could
#ForgottenInventions #LostTechnology #InnovationHistory #Tesla #EV1 #Starlite
https://juskosave.blogspot.com/2026/04/10-forgotten-inventions-that-could-have.html

10 forgotten #inventions that could have changed the world: Why they disappeared
Forgotten inventions like #water‑powered #cars, #Tesla’s wireless #energy, and the EV1 could
#ForgottenInventions #LostTechnology #InnovationHistory #Tesla #EV1 #Starlite
https://juskosave.blogspot.com/2026/04/10-forgotten-inventions-that-could-have.html

Can Europe create AI that we actually understand?

Credit: Tara Winstead from Pexels Artificial intelligence is becoming increasingly important in nearly every aspect of society, but…
#Europe #EU #computernews #hi-technews #hitech #informationtechnology #innovation #inventions
https://www.europesays.com/europe/15230/

The Author Depositing His Voice at the Patent-Office, to Prevent Counterfeiting (1894) by Albert Robida, from “The End of Books”, Scribner's Magazine.

Source: University of Toronto Libraries / Internet Archive

https://pdimagearchive.org/images/0d1e7147-b66e-451d-9a2f-6fc28a93ae04

#patents #technology #recording #communication #offices #inventions #retrofuturism #art #publicdomain

Bram Cohen and BitTorrent
https://negativepid.blog/bram-cohen-and-bittorrent/

#bramCohen #bitTorrent #onlineStreaming #fileDistribution #networking #internet #internetArchitecture #tech #IT #science #STEM #computing #inventions #innovation #negativepid