# data[].attributes.body
The iPhone X is the newest iPhone of all iPhone's products. It has been updated by a lot, without the home button, Animoji, Face ID, vertical camera, and the full display. The version that the phone came out with was iOS 11. The iPhone X was released on November 3, 2017.
(info from)
https://www.apple.com/iphone-x/

# data[].attributes.body
The very first iPhone was released on June 29, 2007. The CEO of iPhone is Steve Jobs. The first was version 7.3.
(info from)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_iPhone

# data[].attributes.body
This is a flip phone and it was made in 1889-1993.  Motorola was the first company to produce the first phone and it took off from there.
(info from)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clamshell_design

# data[].attributes.body
This is a brick phone. This phone is not that pretty but it worked even better than the last phone. The first brick phone was made in April 3, 1973 by Martin Cooper from Motorola.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a very old phone but it is not the very first phone. This phone was made when technology was just starting and making its way to get better.

# data[].attributes.body
Phones are very popular nowadays. We use them everyday and every time. Phones make communication very easy and fast.

# data[].attributes.body
Another reason technology keeps getting more and more expensive is because the people that make the technology say that every thing else can get more expensive they have o make their stuff more expensive.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Technology makes things better. Not morally, of course: military technology kills and maims people more efficiently, surveillance technology invades privacy more pervasively, and so forth. But improved technology leads to more output from less input for any system. Almost a tautology, right? I mean, that's the whole point. So why, in our technology-laced world, do certain domains keep getting more expensive and less efficient?

This is veering dangerously close to economics, and I'm anything but an economist, so let me quickly outsource most of that talk to Slate Star Codex, talking about cost disease, and Pedestrian Observations, discussing infrastructure. First, Scott Alexander, who's always worth reading, in a two- parter at SSC:

in the past fifty years, education costs have doubled, college costs have dectupled, health insurance costs have dectupled, subway costs have at least dectupled, and housing costs have increased by about fifty percent. US health care costs about four times as much as equivalent health care in other First World countries; US subways cost about eight times as much as equivalent subways in other First World countries. I worry that people don't appreciate how weird this is. [...] And this is especially strange because we expect that improving technology and globalization ought to cut costs. [...] If technology increases productivity for skilled laborers in other industries, then less susceptible industries might end up footing the bill since they have to pay their workers more. There's only one problem: health care and education aren't paying their workers more; in fact, quite the opposite. [...] health care and education costs have managed to increase by ten times without a single cent of the gains going to teachers, doctors, or nurses.

Note that the "cost disease" discussed here is posed as distinct from "Baumol's cost disease" known to economists. And before you think, "Aha, I know the reason why! (...And it happens to be my pet hobbyhorse!)", please go read both of those posts, where a whole cornucopia of causes are considered in great detail. In particular

institutional risk tolerance (e.g. for lawsuits)

"free riders"

administrative bloat

organizational complexity

widespread market failures "due to trickery, or to the difficulty of gathering accurate information"

"America just isn't very good at regulation"

"lots more rules and regulations"

"fifty years of optimization of wealth extraction"

"industries shifted focus to servicing deeper into the tail of the population aptitude/effort"

"the 'missing' money is ending up in the pockets of the super-wealthy elite"

etc.

None of these explanations seem individually convincing. The libertarian ones are disproved by the many counterexamples in nations whose governments are far more economically involved; fear of litigation hardly seems to apply to the 10xing of higher education costs; "money siphoned to the super-rich" seems to contradict "administrative bloat," and both seem too obvious and simplistic (who's getting super-rich from higher education? What's the administrative bloat of a subway project?); "complexity costs," again, don't explain why Korean subways are so much cheaper than American ones.

Let's dig a little further into those construction costs, because they're among the most stunning and inexplicable ones. You can argue, if wrongly and tendentiously IMHO, that American higher education is more expensive because it's better, that American healthcare is more expensive because it's better and ( rolls eyes) subsidizes drug discovery worldwide, etc., but nobody who has experienced both versions can seriously argue that new American subway systems are superior to those of Paris or Seoul.

And yet, as Pedestrian Observations, er, observes, in a remarkable comparison of subway construction costs around the world:

Portland's light rail Milwaukie extension and Washington's predominantly above ground Silver Line both have cost ranges of about $100-150 million per km, enough for a full subway in many European cities ... Observe from the low costs of Italian subways that corruption alone cannot explain high American and British costs ... The labor costs in developing countries are lower, but so is labor productivity.

We expect technology to make that kind of construction more efficient, both directly, by constructing better machines for the specific purpose, and indirectly, by making information transfer more efficient. But while I am no construction engineer it seems unlikely that French and Korean subway engineering technology is meaningfully different from that used in NYC and London. In America, though - and in the UK, so it's not just about "excess" national wealth - these technological advantages are being swamped by something else, some kind of cost disease apparently unique to the English-speaking developed world.

But I put it to you that this something else, this cost disease and/or market failure, is not independent of technology at all. Whatever it is - a confluence of all of the factors above, evolved into a vicious-spiral feedback loop, perhaps - it seems to me very likely that cost disease itself is somehow technology-driven. I know that sounds kind of crazy, but so does this whole situation.

Ultimately, the enormous amounts of excess money poured into these English-speaking industries goes to some kind of economic parasite, whether or not they imagine themselves as much. That is true whether you want to blame government bureaucrats, tenured and sinecured public employees, corporate rentiers, free riders, trial lawyers, fat-cat administrators, or the 1%, depending on your politics. Over the last few decades they, whoever they are, have gotten a full order of magnitude better at their parasitism. It's possible that this is unrelated to better technology over that time period. Possible, but unlikely. It seems more likely that more efficient information transfer has contributed to the hypergrowth of economic parasites in certain nations which lacked effective cultural, economic, or legal immune systems against this ongoing infestation.

I don't pretend to know the exact mechanism by which this happened. Really my primary objective with this post is just to signal-boost the whole maddening topic. But I think that if we start envisioning the situation this way - the American economy as an apparently mighty elephant invisibly infested and weakened by (possibly many species of) parasites, emboldened and engorged by the very technology on which the elephant feeds - it might be easier to have a rational discussion about issues like single-payer health care and equal access to education. Both of which would, in fact, be very easy for a nation as rich as America to afford, if not for the parasites that make them inaccessible.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Technology makes things better. Not morally, of course: military technology kills and maims people more efficiently, surveillance technology invades privacy more pervasively, and so forth. But improved technology leads to more output from less input for any system. Almost a tautology, right? I mean, that's the whole point.

# data[].attributes.headline
How has technology evolved over the years?

# data[].attributes.subject
How has technology evolved over the years?

# data[].attributes.body
Technology has become better and better every year. Companies always try to update their products or use better materials for the product. The better materials and updates the product has the more expensive it is going to be

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Kids these days have it pretty good, don't they? Long gone are the days when you were hooked up to the Internet via your home telephone line - which meant that you couldn't talk on the phone and surf the web at the same time. In fact, traditional phone lines are becoming more nonexistent by the second - and people are abandoning landlines in favor of Internet-based phone services. Advances in technology and new gadgets have made our lives significantly easier and more connected, but they have also changed our lives in ways that we couldn't have predicted even as late as ten years ago. Here are a few ways that technology has evolved over time and made life's problems a little bit easier to solve.

Life Before Smartphones

Can you even remember life before smartphones? These handy devices came into our lives and changed the way we socialize, work, and carry out our day-to-day tasks. Although we've made major advances in mobile technology, we've become a society that hardly talks - and a majority of our daily communication takes place via text! Just by taking a step outside and seeing people's faces buried in their screens will give you a gist of how impactful smartphone technology has become. But in the pre-smartphone age, calling was much more widely accepted and face-to-face conversation was the norm.

From Blockbuster to Netflix

Netflix has taken over the Internet, to the point where 35 percent of all Internet traffic comes from streaming their video service. But before Netflix, we actually used to have to go to the store and rent a DVD (or VHS) and take it back at a pre-determined date. But who has time for that these days? Could you imagine having to remember to take a tape back to the store? It seems like something of the forgotten past, especially with emerging technology that allows on-demand streaming of thousands of movies and television shows. But in the Blockbuster era, we had to physically trek through aisles and aisles before finding a the perfect movie to rent.

From Dial-up To Wireless

In the dial-up days, America Online was the dominant player. AOL's instant messaging platform was like the equivalent of today's social media at the time. Dial-up Internet was slow, relatively unreliable, and cut out when someone answered the telephone. And of course, who can forget those annoying sounds when you were first connecting? Social media today is fairly ubiquitous compared to AOL Internet in its early days, when there weren't nearly as many blogs or social communities to join. The evolution of social media has completely transformed our culture and our world.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Major Ways that Technology Has Evolved Over Time

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Kids these days have it pretty good, don't they? Long gone are the days when you were hooked up to the Internet via your home telephone line - which meant that you couldn't talk on the phone and surf the web at the same time.

# data[].attributes.body
Technology is very expensive for many reasons. One of the reason is that the better the product is the better the material it is going to have. If the product has very expensive material it is going to be expensive.

# data[].attributes.headline
WHY DO WE THINK TECHNOLOGY IS IMPORTANT?

# data[].attributes.subject
WHY DO WE THINK TECHNOLOGY IS IMPORTANT?

# data[].attributes.body
We think that technology is important because it has many uses and we use it everyday. Technology is used in businesses, schools. stores, home,etc. If we didn't have technology we would not be able to communicate fast and everything would be very different.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
An Original Article from eHow.com

Technology has important effects on business operations. No matter the size of your enterprise, technology has both tangible and intangible benefits that will help you make money and produce the results your customers demand. Technological infrastructure affects the culture, efficiency and relationships of a business. It also affects the security of confidential information and trade advantages.

Other People Are Reading
Importance of Emerging Technology Why Information Technology Is Important
Communication With Customers

First and foremost, technology affects a firm's ability to communicate with customers. In today's busy business environment, it is necessary for employees to interact with clients quickly and clearly. Websites allow customers to find answers to their questions after hours. Fast shipment options allow businesses to move products over a large geographic area. When customers use technology to interact with a business, the business benefits because better communication creates a stronger public image.

Efficiency of Operations

Technology also helps a business understand its cash flow needs and preserve precious resources such as time and physical space. Warehouse inventory technologies let business owners understand how best to manage the storage costs of holding a product. With proper technology in place, executives can save time and money by holding meetings over the Internet instead of at corporate headquarters.
Sponsored Links
QuickBooks Online
Must Have Tool for Business Owners. Access Anywhere. Try it for Free!
quickbooksonline.in
Business Culture and Class Relations

Technology creates a team dynamic within a business because employees at different locations have better interactions. If factory managers can communicate with shipment coordinators at a different location, tensions and distrust are less likely to evolve. Cliques and social tensions can become a nightmare for a business; technology often helps workers put their different backgrounds aside.

Security

Most businesses of the modern era are subject to security threats and vandalism. Technology can be used to protect financial data, confidential executive decisions and other proprietary information that leads to competitive advantages. Simply put, technology helps businesses keep their ideas away from their competition. By having computers with passwords, a business can ensure none of its forthcoming projects will be copied by the competition.

Research Capacity

A business that has the technological capacity to research new opportunities will stay a step ahead of its competition. For a business to survive, it must grow and acquire new opportunities. The Internet allows a business to virtually travel into new markets without the cost of an executive jet or the risks of creating a factory abroad.
Click here to view the original article.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why is Technology Important in Business? |

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
An Original Article from eHow.com Technology has important effects on business operations. No matter the size of your enterprise, technology has both tangible and intangible benefits that will help you make money and produce the results your customers demand. Technological infrastructure affects the culture, efficiency and relationships of a business.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The human discovery that round nodules of flint can be split and chipped to form a sharp edge is extremely ancient. Tools made in this way have been found in Africa from about 2.5 million years ago (the earliest known examples have been discovered at Gona, in the Awash Valley in Ethiopia). Gradually, over the millennia, in an extremely slow version of an industrial revolution, new and improved techniques are developed for striking off slivers of stone.

Variations in the flints found with fossil remains (differing both in the method by which flakes are chipped from the core, and in the range of shapes created) are used by anthropologists as one way of assigning human skeletal remains to specific groups or Divisions of the Stone Age.

An event of crucial importance in the development of technology is man's taming of fire. This probably happens some 500,000 years ago in China, where the caves occupied by Peking man contain what appear to be hearths. Some experts believe there is evidence of the use of fire much earlier in south Africa.

It will be many millennia before fire is adapted to any purpose other than for warmth and for roasting meat and root vegetables. But more than 250,000 years ago hunters realize that the sharpened point of a wooden spear can be hardened by charring it in embers.

The technological potential of fire is not discovered until well into the neolithic period. Pottery, fired in a primitive kiln, is known from about 6500 BC. The smelting and casting of metal require considerably higher temperatures and are not attempted until much later, from about 4000 BC. The introduction of copper, and then bronze, brings to an end the neolithic period.

Other basic technologies, not requiring fire, are well established in neolithic times. Textiles feature almost as early as Pottery. Weights designed for spinning are common in neolithic sites, and fragments of fine woven cloth survive in graves at Catal Huyuk from as early as 5800 BC.

An innovation in the neolithic period is the use of bricks. In their simplest form (still familiar today in many hot regions), bricks are shaped by pressing mud or clay into a mould. The damp blocks are then left to bake hard in the sun. Bricks of this kind are known in Jericho from about 8000 BC.

The more durable type of brick, baked in a kiln, is an offshoot of the potter's technology. Kiln bricks are widely used in the two earliest civilizations, in Mesopotamia and Egypt, often to provide the outer surface of walls on an inner core of sun-dried brick.

The thread can be turned into fabric in either of two ways. One of them links a continuous length of thread in rows of interconnected loops. This is knitting, which can create garments of any shape.

The other method, going back to at least 5800 BC, uses the thread in a rectangular criss-cross pattern to produce flat cloth. The vertical threads are stretched taut to form a grille; the horizontal threads are then interwoven between them. This is the process for all textiles of cotton, linen, silk or wool. It also produces tapestry. It makes the cloth which is decorated in embroidery. When loops are inserted, it gives the soft pile of rugs and carpets. All these involve the basic craft of weaving.

Until recently the earliest known scraps of cloth are woven from wool; dating from about 5800 BC, they come from Catal Huyuk in Anatolia. Similarly the first known example of linen has been from about 5000 BC in Egypt, where flax (an indigenous wild plant in the Mediterranean region) is cultivated. But a small woven fragment discovered in 1993 near the upper reaches of the Tigris probably pushes back the available evidence. It appears to be linen and has been dated to about 7000 BC.

Cotton is grown in both Eurasia and America; woven cotton survives from about 2500 BC in the Indus valley and slightly later in Peru. The most precisely localized source of any major fabric is China, where pieces of woven silk are known from about 2850 BC.

The harnessing of draught animals is a major technological advance in agriculture as well as transport. The first to be harnessed is the ox, conveniently provided by nature with a fleshy hump above the shoulders. A yoke laid in front of this will remain in place even when a heavy burden is pulled. Sometimes a lighter yoke is attached to the horns. Oxen are dragging heavy objects or loaded sledges by about 4000 BC.

The camel has an even more convenient hump. Its height makes it less suitable for draught purposes than the ox, but from perhaps 1000 BC it is used in Asia and north Africa for drawing wagons and for ploughing. By contrast, harnessing the horse proves problematical.

When a pot is built up from the base by hand, it is impossible that it should be perfectly round. The solution to this problem ia the potter's wheel, which has been a crucial factor in the history of ceramics. It is not known when or where the potter's wheel is introduced. Indeed it is likely that it develops very gradually, from a platform on which the potter turns the pot before shaping another side (thus avoiding having to walk around it).

By about 3000 BC a simple revolving wheel is a part of the potter's equipment in Mesopotamia, the cradle of so many innovations.

The wheel is often quoted as the single most important advance in early technology. It is sometimes said to have evolved from the potter's wheel. Both are first known at approximately the same period, around 3000 BC. But they share no geographical origin and it is intrinsically unlikely that either form would suggest the other. Each is a natural solution to a very different problem.

In early technology a wagon wheel can only be made from wood. Several of the earliest known wheels have been found in the heavily forested regions of Europe.

Page 1 of 6

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The human discovery that round nodules of flint can be split and chipped to form a sharp edge is extremely ancient. Tools made in this way have been found in Africa from about 2.5 million years ago (the earliest known examples have been discovered at Gona, in the Awash Valley in Ethiopia).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
history of technology, the development over time of systematic techniques for making and doing things. The term technology, a combination of the Greek technē, "art, craft," with logos, "word, speech," meant in Greece a discourse on the arts, both fine and applied. When it first appeared in English in the 17th century, it was used to mean a discussion of the applied arts only, and gradually these "arts" themselves came to be the object of the designation. By the early 20th century the term embraced a growing range of means, processes, and ideas in addition to tools and machines. By mid-century technology was defined by such phrases as "the means or activity by which man seeks to change or manipulate his environment." Even such broad definitions have been criticized by observers who point out the increasing difficulty of distinguishing between scientific inquiry and technological activity.

A highly compressed account of the history of technology such as this one must adopt a rigorous methodological pattern if it is to do justice to the subject without grossly distorting it one way or another. The plan followed in the present article is primarily chronological, tracing the development of technology through phases that succeed each other in time. Obviously, the division between phases is to a large extent arbitrary. One factor in the weighting has been the enormous acceleration of Western technological development in recent centuries; Eastern technology is considered in this article in the main only as it relates to the development of modern technology.

Within each chronological phase a standard method has been adopted for surveying the technological experience and innovations. This begins with a brief review of the general social conditions of the period under discussion, and then goes on to consider the dominant materials and sources of power of the period, and their application to food production, manufacturing industry, building construction, transport and communications, military technology, and medical technology. In a final section the sociocultural consequences of technological change in the period are examined. This framework is modified according to the particular requirements of every period- discussions of new materials, for instance, occupy a substantial place in the accounts of earlier phases when new metals were being introduced but are comparatively unimportant in descriptions of some of the later phases-but the general pattern is retained throughout. One key factor that does not fit easily into this pattern is that of the development of tools. It has seemed most convenient to relate these to the study of materials, rather than to any particular application, but it has not been possible to be completely consistent in this treatment. Further discussion of specific areas of technological development is provided in a variety of other articles: for example, see electronics; exploration; information processing.

General considerations

Essentially, techniques are methods of creating new tools and products of tools, and the capacity for constructing such artifacts is a determining characteristic of humanlike species. Other species make artifacts: bees build elaborate hives to deposit their honey, birds make nests, and beavers build dams. But these attributes are the result of patterns of instinctive behaviour and cannot be varied to suit rapidly changing circumstances. Human beings, in contrast to other species, do not possess highly developed instinctive reactions but do have the capacity to think systematically and creatively about techniques. Humans can thus innovate and consciously modify the environment in a way no other species has achieved. An ape may on occasion use a stick to beat bananas from a tree, but a person can fashion the stick into a cutting tool and remove a whole bunch of bananas. Somewhere in the transition between the two, the hominid, the first humanlike species, emerges. By virtue of humanity's nature as a toolmaker, humans have therefore been technologists from the beginning, and the history of technology encompasses the whole evolution of humankind.

In using rational faculties to devise techniques and modify the environment, humankind has attacked problems other than those of survival and the production of wealth with which the term technology is usually associated today. The technique of language, for example, involves the manipulation of sounds and symbols in a meaningful way, and similarly the techniques of artistic and ritual creativity represent other aspects of the technological incentive. This article does not deal with these cultural and religious techniques, but it is valuable to establish their relationship at the outset because the history of technology reveals a profound interaction between the incentives and opportunities of technological innovation on the one hand and the sociocultural conditions of the human group within which they occur on the other.

Social involvement in technological advances

An awareness of this interaction is important in surveying the development of technology through successive civilizations. To simplify the relationship as much as possible, there are three points at which there must be some social involvement in technological innovation: social need, social resources, and a sympathetic social ethos. In default of any of these factors it is unlikely that a technological innovation will be widely adopted or be successful.

The sense of social need must be strongly felt, or people will not be prepared to devote resources to a technological innovation. The thing needed may be a more efficient cutting tool, a more powerful lifting device, a labour-saving machine, or a means of using new fuels or a new source of energy. Or, because military needs have always provided a stimulus to technological innovation, it may take the form of a requirement for better weapons. In modern societies, needs have been generated by advertising. Whatever the source of social need, it is essential that enough people be conscious of it to provide a market for an artifact or commodity that can meet the need.

Social resources are similarly an indispensable prerequisite to a successful innovation. Many inventions have foundered because the social resources vital for their realization-the capital, materials, and skilled personnel-were not available. The notebooks of Leonardo da Vinci are full of ideas for helicopters, submarines, and airplanes, but few of these reached even the model stage because resources of one sort or another were lacking. The resource of capital involves the existence of surplus productivity and an organization capable of directing the available wealth into channels in which the inventor can use it. The resource of materials involves the availability of appropriate metallurgical, ceramic, plastic, or textile substances that can perform whatever functions a new invention requires of them. The resource of skilled personnel implies the presence of technicians capable of constructing new artifacts and devising novel processes. A society, in short, has to be well primed with suitable resources in order to sustain technological innovation.

A sympathetic social ethos implies an environment receptive to new ideas, one in which the dominant social groups are prepared to consider innovation seriously. Such receptivity may be limited to specific fields of innovation-for example, improvements in weapons or in navigational techniques-or it may take the form of a more generalized attitude of inquiry, as was the case among the industrial middle classes in Britain during the 18th century, who were willing to cultivate new ideas and inventors, the breeders of such ideas. Whatever the psychological basis of inventive genius, there can be no doubt that the existence of socially important groups willing to encourage inventors and to use their ideas has been a crucial factor in the history of technology.

Social conditions are thus of the utmost importance in the development of new techniques, some of which will be considered below in more detail. It is worthwhile, however, to register another explanatory note. This concerns the rationality of technology. It has already been observed that technology involves the application of reason to techniques, and in the 20th century it came to be regarded as almost axiomatic that technology is a rational activity stemming from the traditions of modern science. Nevertheless, it should be observed that technology, in the sense in which the term is being used here, is much older than science, and also that techniques have tended to ossify over centuries of practice or to become diverted into such para-rational exercises as alchemy. Some techniques became so complex, often depending upon processes of chemical change that were not understood even when they were widely practiced, that technology sometimes became itself a "mystery" or cult into which an apprentice had to be initiated like a priest into holy orders, and in which it was more important to copy an ancient formula than to innovate. The modern philosophy of progress cannot be read back into the history of technology; for most of its long existence technology has been virtually stagnant, mysterious, and even irrational. It is not fanciful to see some lingering fragments of this powerful technological tradition in the modern world, and there is more than an element of irrationality in the contemporary dilemma of a highly technological society contemplating the likelihood that it will use its sophisticated techniques in order to accomplish its own destruction. It is thus necessary to beware of overfacile identification of technology with the "progressive" forces in contemporary civilization.

On the other hand it is impossible to deny that there is a progressive element in technology, as it is clear from the most elementary survey that the acquisition of techniques is a cumulative matter, in which each generation inherits a stock of techniques on which it can build if it chooses and if social conditions permit. Over a long period of time the history of technology inevitably highlights the moments of innovation that show this cumulative quality as some societies advance, stage by stage, from comparatively primitive to more sophisticated techniques. But although this development has occurred and is still going on, it is not intrinsic to the nature of technology that such a process of accumulation should occur, and it has certainly not been an inevitable development. The fact that many societies have remained stagnant for long periods of time, even at quite developed stages of technological evolution, and that some have actually regressed and lost the accumulated techniques passed on to them, demonstrates the ambiguous nature of technology and the critical importance of its relationship with other social factors.

Modes of technological transmission

Another aspect of the cumulative character of technology that will require further investigation is the manner of transmission of technological innovations. This is an elusive problem, and it is necessary to accept the phenomenon of simultaneous or parallel invention in cases in which there is insufficient evidence to show the transmission of ideas in one direction or another. The mechanics of their transmission have been enormously improved in recent centuries by the printing press and other means of communication and also by the increased facility with which travelers visit the sources of innovation and carry ideas back to their own homes. Traditionally, however, the major mode of transmission has been the movement of artifacts and craftsmen. Trade in artifacts has ensured their widespread distribution and encouraged imitation. Even more important, the migration of craftsmen-whether the itinerant metalworkers of early civilizations or the German rocket engineers whose expert knowledge was acquired by both the Soviet Union and the United States after World War II-has promoted the spread of new technologies.

The evidence for such processes of technological transmission is a reminder that the material for the study of the history of technology comes from a variety of sources. Much of it relies, like any historical examination, on documentary matter, although this is sparse for the early civilizations because of the general lack of interest in technology on the part of scribes and chroniclers. For these societies, therefore, and for the many millennia of earlier unrecorded history in which slow but substantial technological advances were made, it is necessary to rely heavily upon archaeological evidence. Even in connection with the recent past, the historical understanding of the processes of rapid industrialization can be made deeper and more vivid by the study of "industrial archaeology." Much valuable material of this nature has been accumulated in museums, and even more remains in the place of its use for the observation of the field worker. The historian of technology must be prepared to use all these sources, and to call upon the skills of the archaeologist, the engineer, the architect, and other specialists as appropriate.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
History of technology | Evolution, Ages, & Facts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
History of technology, the development over time of systematic techniques for making and doing things. The term technology, a combination of the Greek techne, 'art, craft,' with logos, 'word, speech,' meant in Greece a discourse on the arts, both fine and applied.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
3000- 600BCE

Bronze Age: Widespread use of copper and its important alloy bronze.

2000 BCE

Water-raising and irrigation devices like the shaduf (shadoof), invented by the Ancient Egyptians, introduce the idea of lifting things using counterweights.

800-1300 CE

Thanks to inventors such as the Ban&umacr; M&umacr;s&amacr; brothers and al-Jazari, the Islamic "Golden Age" sees the development of a wide range of technologies, including ingenious clocks and feedback mechanisms that are the ancestors of modern automated factory machines.

William Gilbert publishes his great book De Magnete describing how Earth behaves like a giant magnet. It's the beginning of the scientific study of magnetism.

mid-17th century

Antoni van Leeuwenhoek and Robert Hooke independently develop microscopes.

Gottfried Leibniz pioneers the binary number system now used in virtually all computers.

1700s

Christiaan Huygens conceives the internal combustion engine, but never actually builds one.

Car engines

1730s- 1770s

John Harrison develops reliable chronometers (seafaring clocks) that allow sailors to measure longitude accurately for the first time.

1820s- 1830s

Michael Faraday builds primitive electric generators and motors.

Scottish physicist James Prescott Joule outlines the theory of the conservation of energy.

1881

Jacques d'Arsonval suggests heat energy could be extracted from the oceans.

OTEC (Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion)

Nikola Tesla patents the alternating current (AC) electric induction motor and, in opposition to Thomas Edison, becomes a staunch advocate of AC power.

Wallace Carothers develops neoprene (synthetic rubber used in wetsuits) and nylon, the first popular synthetic clothing material.

John Bardeen, Walter Brattain, and William Shockley invent the transistor, which allows electronic equipment to made much smaller and leads to the modern computer revolution.

Stanford Ovshinksy develops various technologies that make renewable energy more practical, including practical solar cells and improved rechargeable batteries.

Jack Kilby and Robert Noyce, working independently, develop the integrated circuit.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
History of invention: A science and technology timeline

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
3000- 600BCE Bronze Age: Widespread use of copper and its important alloy bronze. 2000 BCE Water-raising and irrigation devices like the shaduf (shadoof), invented by the Ancient Egyptians, introduce the idea of lifting things using counterweights.

# data[].attributes.body
We use technology everyday. We might use it at school at home everywhere in general