万维网已经被告知了，但更基本的，我会说“DNS”。 似乎它是在1983年发明的(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_Name_System)，恕我直言，我们可以认为它是互联网协议的发明和传播到世界各地的能力之间的强制性联系，现在被称为网络。

还是在“网络”部分，我要加上WIFI。它是在90年代发明的(但我同意它不完全是“计算”，而更多地与硬件有关)。

在更严格的“算法”部分，我想到了turbocodes(1993年);有人说它只是接近了香农信号理论所定义的极限，但这种论点难道不会否定所有其他对“一切都已经在洛夫莱斯、巴贝奇和图灵的作品中萌芽”的回答吗?

在密码学领域，我想加上P.Zimmermann(1991年)的PGP程序，它为公民带来了一个相当健壮的(当时)免费加密程序，并有助于动摇政府对加密的立场。事实上，我认为这是密码学“自由化”的因素之一，这是发展电子商务的前提。

传感器网络:非常微小的(纳米级)计算机形成自组织p2p网络并传输“传感”信息。

3D打印:物理对象的《星际迷航》复制器(还没有Early Grey茶)。

DNA计算:针对某些类型问题的大规模并行计算。

在操作系统核心开发中使用函数式编程/语言。

回答“为什么新思想会消亡”和“如何应对”这两个问题?

I suspect a lot of the lack of progress is due to the massive influx of capital and entrenched wealth in the industry. Sounds counterintuitive, but I think it's become conventional wisdom that any new idea gets one shot; if it doesn't make it at the first try, it can't come back. It gets bought by someone with entrenched interests, or just FAILs, and the energy is gone. A couple examples are tablet computers, and integrated office software. The Newton and several others had real potential, but ended up (through competitive attrition and bad judgment) squandering their birthrights, killing whole categories. (I was especially fond of Ashton Tate's Framework; but I'm still stuck with Word and Excel).

怎么办呢?首先想到的是Wm。莎士比亚的建议:“让我们杀了所有的律师。”但恐怕他们现在装备太精良了。实际上，我认为最好的选择是找到某种开源计划。它们似乎比其他选择更好地保持可访问性和增量改进。但是这个行业已经变得足够大了，所以某种有机的合作机制是必要的。

I also think that there's a dynamic that says that the entrenched interests (especially platforms) require a substantial amount of change - churn - to justify continuing revenue streams; and this absorbs a lot of creative energy that could have been spent in better ways. Look how much time we spend treading water with the newest iteration from Microsoft or Sun or Linux or Firefox, making changes to systems that for the most part work fine already. It's not because they are evil, it's just built into the industry. There's no such thing as Stable Equilibrium; all the feedback mechanisms are positive, favoring change over stability. (Did you ever see a feature withdrawn, or a change retracted?)

关于SO的另一个讨论线索是臭鼬工厂综合症(参考:Geoffrey Moore):在大型组织中，真正的创新几乎总是(90%以上)出现在自发出现的未经授权的项目中，这些项目完全由个人或小团队的主动性推动(通常会受到正式的管理等级的反对)。所以:质疑权威，反抗体制。

更好的用户界面。

今天的用户界面仍然很糟糕。我指的不是小的方面，而是大的、基本的方面。我不禁注意到，即使是最好的程序也仍然有一些接口，这些接口要么极其复杂，要么需要以其他方式进行大量的抽象思考，而且无法达到传统的非软件工具的易用性。

诚然，这是由于软件可以比传统工具做更多的事情。但这不是接受现状的理由。此外，大多数软件都做得不好。

In general, applications still lack a certain “just works” feeling are too much oriented by what can be done, rather than what should be done. One point that has been raised time and again, and that is still not solved, is the point of saving. Applications crash, destroying hours of work. I have the habit of pressing Ctrl+S every few seconds (of course, this no longer works in web applications). Why do I have to do this? It's mind-numbingly stupid. This is clearly a task for automation. Of course, the application also has to save a diff for every modification I make (basically an infinite undo list) in case I make an error.

解决这个问题其实并不难。在每个应用程序中都很难实现它，因为没有好的API可以做到这一点。编程工具和库必须显著改进，才能在所有平台和程序上轻松实现这些工作，适用于所有具有任意备份存储且不需要用户交互的文件格式。但在我们最终开始编写“好的”应用程序而不仅仅是足够的应用程序之前，这是必要的一步。

I believe that Apple currently approximates the “just works” feeling best in some regards. Take for example their newest version of iPhoto which features a face recognition that automatically groups photos by people appearing in them. That is a classical task that the user does not want to do manually and doesn't understand why the computer doesn't do it automatically. And even iPhoto is still a very long way from a good UI, since said feature still requires ultimate confirmation by the user (for each photo!), since the face recognition engine isn't perfect.

HTM系统(分层时态记忆)。

人工智能的一种新方法，由杰夫·霍金斯通过《论智能》一书发起。

现在是一家名为Numenta的公司，通过开发“真正的”人工智能来测试这些想法，并邀请社区通过sdk使用该系统来参与。

它更多的是从头开始构建机器智能，而不是试图模仿人类的推理。