The Internet does nothing today that it couldn’t do when invented, but now it’s faster, with video and enough junk e-mail to form another luxury liner-unfriendly iceberg. Like the Model T, cars still have four wheels and get us from Point A to Point B. Even My Favorite Devices (the iPod, lawn vac, and Bluetooth, for example) are formed of Existing Stuff that has merely evolved. Where’s the spark? Where’s the innovation? Or, do I need my meds again?

At a recent presentation at Princeton University, Dr. Nathan Myhrvold said that success in inventing new technologies and products—an under-supported endeavor—is the nation’s greatest hope for prospering in the 21st century. He discussed how much of society is focused not on the initial spark of something completely different, but the steps following invention, such as venture capitalists funding fledgling businesses.

Myhrvold, former Microsoft Chief Technology Officer, finished high school at 14, earned a master’s in physics from UCLA by 19, and earned a PhD in applied mathematics from Princeton at age 23. He’s studied with Stephen Hawking, co-founded Dynamical Systems Inc. (which Microsoft acquired in 1986), discovered T. Rex bones, and is one of the few individuals to help fund a project that aims to reconstruct an ancient ecosystem by connecting the dots between fossils. Putting his money where his mouth is, in 2000 he co-founded Intellectual Ventures to invest in innovation and invention. That’s just the overview. Oh. He’s worth somewhere north of $650 million, too. Yes, this is someone to whom we should listen. Intently.

In an article in MIT’s Technology Review, Myhrvold “…lamented the shift in attitudes and mission for the major corporate research houses, noting that stalwarts such as Lucent Technologies’ Bell Labs and IBM’s Watson Research have moved from a more blue sky approach to one focused on short-term gains with an impact on existing products. ‘These research houses are shadows of their former selves,’ Myhrvold asserted. ‘In these big companies, you don’t invent. Most engineers are paid not to invent,’ he said. ‘You’re mostly [working with] products. If you asked research managers if they could make a competitive, decent product without inventing anything new, would they do it, the answer would be Hallelujah brother!’ Academia has also seen a decline in inventive activity, according to Myhrvold. ‘You can be a tenured professor at MIT these days without having invented anything,’ he said.”

Imagine a world without great inventions, one without automobiles, airplanes, Nylon, or even Velcro. Sure, it’s a wonderful thing to pursue smaller, faster, lighter, cheaper. Those evolutions cannot exist, however, without that ‘spark’ so dearly cherished by Saint Nathan . ‘Invention’ means even more in a world in which smaller means no SUVs, faster means even more paper, lighter means we’ll be expected to carry even more, and cheaper means outsourcing.

Perhaps someone can invent a way to better enjoy life and the wonder around us. Oh, yeah. That’s already been done considering, for example, Buckminster Fuller. “…More and more life support for everybody,” Bucky said, “…with less and less resources.” Fuller is another one of a choice few to whom we should have listened more closely. Have we not paid attention? Again? There’s still time.

READING ROOM

Factory of the Future

Operating Manual for Spaceship Earth

The Road Ahead