The dominant narrative around progress and innovation today goes something like this:

We're in a world of generally fast scientific and technological progress. Things are getting better all the time. Maybe there are some dystopian risks, but that's because the technology moves so fast and could be so scary that it might be destructive.

This narrative still holds up today. It makes it natural to think that big ideas are coming easier and easier

But how true is it really?
How much real progress are we making, and are things really accelerating?

While this question is hard to answer conclusively, I'd like to at least give a differing opinion on the overall accelerationist narrative.

To quote MIT & Stanford researchers on what it takes to keep progressing:

"Just to sustain the constant growth in GDP per person, the U.S. must double the amount of research effort put into searching for a new idea every 13 years to offset the increased difficulty in finding new ideas,”

The same team of researchers also conclude that Moore’s Law isn't a law of nature — the observed doubling of the number of transistors packed onto new computer CPUs is often a target for research programs, and has been achieved only by a massive increase in the amount of resources devoted to accomplishing it.

In fact, research efforts toward semiconductor improvement have risen by a factor of 18 since the 1970s, the study found, while productivity has fallen by the same factor.
Taken together, that means it’s about 18 times harder today to push Moore’s Law forward than it was half a century ago.
A similar pattern can be found within cancer and agriculture research - the other fields that the research team looked at.

While this "only" relates to research efforts - It still serves as a basis to highlight an interesting dynamic – One that I will explain below.

What if the dominant narrative outlined above isn't the whole picture?

What if we're in a situation where innovation is almost an order of magnitude harder than before?

"Well maybe it's harder than before to innovate for most companies, but we're doing more innovation than ever!"

- Company / Founder looking to stand out from the crowd.

Let's end with a thought experiment:

In a world where innovation has stagnated, being innovative (or in lieu of that, appearing innovative) will become even more important, and the emphasis placed on it would be even higher.

Wouldn't many founders and companies as well as other actors in that world have a strong incentive to push the same narrative - "We're moving so fast and constantly innovating" ?