I don't believe that government is good at picking technology, particularly technology that is changing. By the time you get it done and go through democracy, it's so outdated.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Government isn't that good at rapid advancement of technology. It tends to be better at funding basic research. To have things take off, you've got to have commercial companies do it.
Government is supposed to be about how we do things together, and we can do that much more together if we use technology smartly right now.
The message I'm trying to send is that technology is political, and that many decisions that look like decisions about technology actually are not at all about technology - they are about politics, and they need to be scrutinized as closely as we would scrutinize decisions about politics.
Personally, I believe that government, rather than money, tends to be the primary factor limiting the development of new technologies.
I think the thing that our government lacks - just about more than anything else - is technological competence. We have some of the greatest white-hat hackers in the world here in the U.S., but the government seems to be technologically illiterate.
Technology is moving quickly. Policy is not moving as quickly.
The next great technology revolution might be around the corner, but it won't automatically improve most people's lives. That will depend on politics, which is indeed ugly but also inescapable.
It has been claimed at times that our modern age of technology facilitates dictatorship.
The problem is that there are very few technologies that essentially haven't changed for 60, 70 years.
I think technology has changed America, not any one organization. Technology is taking the power away from the few. There'll be a lot more choices, and good people who are doing serious stuff will survive and there'll be a lot more voices, and that is very healthy.
No opposing quotes found.