Let's see... what are my reactions?
1: Nuclear arms
There's a good point here, actually. The US can blow the crap out of anything without resorting to nukes - a few tanks of petrol and some air is all you really need. For the modern world, nukes are a liability for the reasons Sterling's outlined. Fortunately, they're not quite as easily stolen as he'd have us believe.
Wait, who am I kidding? My cousin accidentally bought six nuclear warheads in Russia and didn't realise until he got them home to Australia. That's kinda freaky.
2: Coal-Based Power
It's a current power source, so is fairly necessary. Nevertheless, if you could get rid of it, I bet you would. Alternatively, everyone could move to volcanic regions with plenty of rivers and generate half their power via hydro or geotherms, like we do in New Zealand. Which poses the obvious risk of being blown up or doused in sulphurous magma every few decades, of course.
3: Internal Combustion Engine
Well, duh. This thing has had only cosmetic enhancements since its genesis two centuries ago. It's outdated technology, and if more research had been put into finding a solution, everyone would surely be much happier. It's the old Greek argument for having slaves - what on Earth would they do if we abolished slavery? Well, we freed the slaves and they seem to be doing alright.
4: Incandescent Lightbulbs
I don't mind fluorescent bulbs, actually. Nearly half the bulbs in our house are fluoros, and it's so refreshing (a) not to be bathed in yellow all the time (I reckon fluoro's like daylight in a can) and (b) not to have to change the damn things for 10 years or so. Sure, the energy efficiency only comes when they're active for a long time - activation is the biggest energy drain - so there's still a spot for energy efficient, cheap-activation blubs. It's just that that spot isn't as large as you might think.
5: Land Mines
Again, no duh. Anybody who deploys these weapons knows that they're creating a civilian hazard. It's stupid to do it on your own soil, and it's stupid to do it if you're invading someone else for humanitarian purposes (regime change, that sort of thing). That means the only people who can justify land mines are people who are invading a country without wanting to stay there or care about its people, which isn't too many forces last time I looked.
There is, however, a technology called MetalStorm, applications of which are being marketed as an alternative to landmines as area denial. I forget the link, but the idea involves weapon pods that are easily recovered.
6: Manned Spaceflight
I respectfully disagree. I think we need to get off this planet as fast as possible (I admit, first we have to work on overcoming our physiological responses to space through GE or cybernetics), simply because nobody's going to give up their nukes any time soon, and it's just a matter of time before some loony comes up with something even worse. The 21st century is going to see nanotech enter the world stage; the potential for abuse is mind-boggling. I reiterate: Get off-world now, maybe you can come back in a billion years.
7: Prisons
The principal of punishment is flawed. I can't speak for other countries, but here in New Zealand there have been trials of prison-run workshops where inmates were taught to read or cook for themselves. Upon release, the reoffense rate went down. I think this says something. Prisons still have a place to restrain people dangerous to society at large, but rehabilitation is a real thing, and it deserves more screen time.
That's not his point, though. His point, of course, is flawed - especially in major urban areas, the concentration of offenders under house arrest would be untenable. I think. I'm no penal expert, though.
8: Cosmetic Implants
Biological matter is a wonderful substance. It's self-replicating, it's almost as strong as metal machines that need constant maintenance, and it's supremely multi-purpose.
But it's not the best at everything, and I suppose that's why the first cybernetic implants have crept in under our noses as cosmetics. OK, they're not technically machine-interfaces, but they're artificial matter designed to make people 'better' and function in a different way to biomass.
Which I think is fascinating.
9: Lie Detectors
I think there's definite room for improvement here. But, as a bonus, once technology advances to the point where these things become reliable, we can establish man-machine interfaces and evolve into a planetary gestalt mind. Which I think would be pretty cool.
10: DVDs
Yep, he's talking like Jim Carrey in a Hawaiian shirt here. DVDs are awesome. They're not perfect, of course, but all we need to do to fix that is make lots of noise to the people desiging the next generation, right? Right? Geeks, take back the future?
There's my rant for the hour. Now, what technologies do I think should be retired?
I think we'll soon have the chance to do away with radio transmission (based on advances in quantum teleportation). Infinite-range (or at least global) wireless communication with no microwave emissions would be cool.
I also find myself wondering about the long-term viability of plastic in an oil-haemmorhaging world, but biotech will come up with a solution by the time that becomes an issue, so it's probably moot.
(Before A/C, Congress adjourned for most of the year, since Washington DC was built on a swamp. In fact, the British government considered the climate so bad, Washington was once considered a "hardship post", meaning personnel could wear shorts and pith helmets).
