The worst ideas in science and technology of the 21st century: social media, Bitcoin, carbon offsets and more

Summary

In this episode of New Scientist's World, the Universe and Us, Rowan Hooper and Abby Beal introduce a special list dedicated to naming and shaming the worst ideas in science and technology of the 21st century. They explain that the focus is on ideas that started with promise but later soured, with social media, Bitcoin, carbon offsets, and effective altruism as prominent examples. The discussion brings in reporters and experts to unpack how these ideas arrived at their current state, the evidence behind claims of harm, and possible paths forward. The show also notes that New Scientist has published a list of the 21 best ideas of the century so far, underscoring the dual nature of scientific and technological progress.

Overview

The World, the Universe and Us episode from New Scientist takes a critical look at a handful of the most controversial ideas of the 21st century, labeling them as the clangers and exploring why they went wrong. The hosts Rowan Hooper and Abby Beal explain that the focus is on ideas in science and technology rather than broader social or political faults, and they invite listeners to consider how good intentions can turn into problematic outcomes.

Social media under the spotlight

The discussion begins with social media, tracing its rise from early 2000s platforms to the dominant role it plays today. The conversation emphasizes that social media per se is not inherently bad, but that unrestrained capitalism and algorithmic design have created incentives that prioritize engagement and ad revenue over meaningful value. Guests explain how features like infinite scrolling and targeted advertising have reshaped attention, politics, and everyday life, with anecdotes about mental health concerns and lawsuits. The potential for regulation, personal self-regulation, and even radical proposals like a government-backed platform are weighed, alongside questions about the impact on democracy, elections, and public discourse. The segment also touches on real-world tensions, such as bans for minors and online safety laws, and ends with a note on the mixed legacy of social media’s societal influence.

Bitcoin and the blockchain debate

Leah Crane introduces Bitcoin, describing it as a government-free currency that, in practice, behaves like a massive speculative gamble with serious environmental costs. The discussion explains the blockchain concept using a simple analogy, then delves into the environmental footprint of mining and energy use, comparing it to other forms of activity. The conversation also contrasts Bitcoin with Ethereum, which has moved toward more energy-efficient architectures, and discusses broader issues like the dark web and cryptocurrency’s utility. The consensus is that Bitcoin remains environmentally harmful and largely unutilized as a practical currency, even as the underlying technology (blockchain) has legitimate applications in other contexts.

Carbon offsets and climate solutions

The panel then examines carbon offsets as a climate solution, highlighting core problems such as the risk that offsets may enable continued emissions rather than reducing them. The concept of additionality, counterfactuals, and the permanence of offsets is explored in depth, with explanations of how trees, forest protection, and other projects can fail to deliver real CO2 removal or avoided emissions. The potential of geological carbon storage as a long-term solution is discussed, but cost and scalability remain major obstacles. Overall, offsets are seen as a potentially useful tool in some cases, but not a stand-alone solution to climate change.

Effective altruism and the morality of giving

Josh Lakoff discusses effective altruism as the attempt to rationalize charitable giving to maximize impact. While the approach has produced useful insights, including evidence-based intervention selection and direct cash transfers, it is criticized for reducing morality to calculation and for attracting extreme, sometimes harmful ideas about future risks, such as AI apocalypse scenarios. The conversation also critiques the earning-to-give pathway and high-profile cases of philanthropic missteps, arguing for a broader, more humane ethical framework that respects relationships and social bonds, rather than purely numerical optimization.

Alternative fuels and the energy transition

The final section considers alternative fuels such as synthetic fuels, natural gas, and biofuels. The experts argue that synthetic fuels are technologically promising but currently expensive and energy-intensive, requiring abundant renewable energy that is not yet available. Natural gas is viewed as a transitional fuel that delays the move away from fossil fuels. Biofuels are criticized for their own environmental costs, including deforestation, biodiversity loss, and land-use pressures that can worsen than the fuels they aim to replace. The discussion emphasizes that direct electrification using green electricity is the more efficient and scalable path, with gigafactories playing a pivotal role in enabling widespread electrification. The episode concludes by inviting readers to explore the 21 best ideas of the century and to share missing or additional perspectives on the worst ideas.

Call to action

Throughout the episode, the hosts encourage mindful engagement with science and technology, asking audiences to reflect on the balance between ambition and caution, and to contribute their thoughts on what belongs on the list of 21 best and 21 worst ideas so far.