2000's, The decade that was.

Yeah, it was a blog post...and it seems to be true. The rate of change continues to accelerate and as it does it increases the rate in which change can happen. The law of accelerating returns I suppose.

Oddly enough, I believe it's happening, but I'm not sure I buy into the idea of the singularity. Although I'm not sure how you can have the former without the latter eventually happening.

My brain hurts.

I would argue that the rate of change does not continuously accelerate. Some areas, such as biochemistry and what used to be called metallurgy (but which has now morphed into nanotech) are indeed on an exponential growth curve. Other areas, such as cognition science are only increasing at an incremental pace. Still other areas, such as many of the social sciences, are either static or only inching forward gradually.

Change is not a smooth, easily predictable process -- no matter what Kurzweil might believe. (If anybody wants to place odds against the planet-sized computer by 2099, I'll take that bet.) Learning has a tendency to stall out as natural plateaus are reached, and can remain static for years, even decades.

Forward progress also presumes that other obstacles don't arise to forestall improvements. What effects on the march to the singularity would events such as a global nuclear war, a peak oil energy crisis, or overpopulation-abetted famine or disease have?

I do agree with Gonch that, assuming we don't destroy ourselves or knock our society back to a new Stone Age first, the 'singularity' is inevitable. But it might be in 100 years. Or 1000. Of course, the side-effects of reaching it might be almost as negative as the benefits themselves. I'm not quite worrying about a cyborg rebellion just yet. But if we learn enough to turn every human into a de facto immortal, without compensating for the natural inclination of people to have children, this could be quite a problem down the road.

I would agree that culture doesn't change all that fast. Sometimes it even takes step backwards. I mean, the Montgomery bus boycotts were just over fifty years ago, which is wild to think about in the context that my parents were alive then, and today it's absurd that it even happened (unless of course you live in certain areas of the south, or that barn on I-71 north of Cincy ;)).

I'd say the decade saw the stagnation of North America and the rise of Europe and Asia for amusement parks.

Europe is finally rising and getting the parks they deserve. Places like Phantasialand, Europa Park, Efteling, Disneyland Paris, etc. all got amazing and unique new rides while keeping their amazing theming. Also, they're all in great shape financially, so they didn't dig their way into bankrupcy with new coasters like Six Flags did.

Asia saw in 2001 the opening of the most amazing theme park in the world, Tokyo Disney Sea. China in the second half of the decade saw the Happy Valley group build new theme parks all around the country. Everland in South Korea saw Samsung open up the wallet and investing heavily into the place. T Express, huge indoor-outdoor water park, rebuilt zoo are just a few of the things Everland built. Lotte World opened their two largest rides.

Manufacturer of the decade? I'm forced to say Intamin... They were the only ones crazy enough to accept the bid to build a 262 feet hypercoaster on top of a mall in downtown Tokyo! Runner ups to GCI and Mack.

Company of the decade? Disney. While others ran into trouble, Disney is still running strong. In 2009, chances are, Disneyland will have its best year ever attendance wise. They also announced over 1.5 billion dollars in new capital for their 2 stateside resorts.

Manufacturer of the decade? I'm forced to say Intamin... They were the only ones crazy enough to accept the bid to build a 262 feet hypercoaster on top of a mall in downtown Tokyo! Runner ups to GCI and Mack.

Agreed. They broke into the woodie market, produced coasters that broke the 300 ft (MF, plus it broke 6 other records as well) and 400 ft (TTD & Kingda Ka) barriers.