I think you are taking this quote out of context here. The "sufficiently advanced" bit is specifically tied to the perspective of the observer. It should be understood as " any technology sufficiently advanced beyond the technological level you currently live in is indistinguishable from magic". The breakpoint for whether a technology meets the "sufficiently " portion of "sufficiently advanced" is best understood as whether a technology relies upon understanding of a physical phenomenon we dont currently have awareness of.
A theoretical example of this would be if I could interact with "subspace energy wells" to both generate fire in regular space and modulate the fire through subdpace to regular space resistance variance across the space barrier. The device that allows me to do this may be a singular nanobot lodged in my brain that interprets electrical signals in my brain and sends them out through a cross domain transmitter. We lack the technology to detect any of the signals and every conceivable lab test would fail to account for the magical energy I could summon.
Your comparison to people's understanding of electricity fails this. People may lament that the layperson does not have deeply technical knowledge of how a transformer operates, considerations into line losses, the physics behind how a solar panel works etc but that isn't needed. Laypeople do know that electricity exists, that it is brought to thier home via power lines, that there is a big building outside of town where we burn gas to generate it or that a solar farm makes it etc, and that if they are interested in the technical details they can type the question into Google and be given an AI summary and links to YouTube videos explaining it. They also know that them or thier kid could go down to the local community college and enroll in classes that will teach them skills to get a job out at the PowerPoint or solar farm, that the local electrician business just hired little Timmy from church as an apprentice where he is learning about it. People dont see it as magic because despite not having the deep technical knowledge themselves they know one of thier neighbors does have that knowledge and that it is something taught in schools across the globe.
Also: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo." "Any technology, no matter how primitive, is magic to those who don't understand it." - Florence Ambrose
The problem is that the further one gets from physics the messier things are so one is not going to get quite as reliable results.
I think you are taking this quote out of context here. The "sufficiently advanced" bit is specifically tied to the perspective of the observer. It should be understood as " any technology sufficiently advanced beyond the technological level you currently live in is indistinguishable from magic". The breakpoint for whether a technology meets the "sufficiently " portion of "sufficiently advanced" is best understood as whether a technology relies upon understanding of a physical phenomenon we dont currently have awareness of.
A theoretical example of this would be if I could interact with "subspace energy wells" to both generate fire in regular space and modulate the fire through subdpace to regular space resistance variance across the space barrier. The device that allows me to do this may be a singular nanobot lodged in my brain that interprets electrical signals in my brain and sends them out through a cross domain transmitter. We lack the technology to detect any of the signals and every conceivable lab test would fail to account for the magical energy I could summon.
Your comparison to people's understanding of electricity fails this. People may lament that the layperson does not have deeply technical knowledge of how a transformer operates, considerations into line losses, the physics behind how a solar panel works etc but that isn't needed. Laypeople do know that electricity exists, that it is brought to thier home via power lines, that there is a big building outside of town where we burn gas to generate it or that a solar farm makes it etc, and that if they are interested in the technical details they can type the question into Google and be given an AI summary and links to YouTube videos explaining it. They also know that them or thier kid could go down to the local community college and enroll in classes that will teach them skills to get a job out at the PowerPoint or solar farm, that the local electrician business just hired little Timmy from church as an apprentice where he is learning about it. People dont see it as magic because despite not having the deep technical knowledge themselves they know one of thier neighbors does have that knowledge and that it is something taught in schools across the globe.
Webcomic artist Mark Stanley has a few things to say about magic and technology.
http://freefall.purrsia.com/ff300/fv00255.htm#magic
Also: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo." "Any technology, no matter how primitive, is magic to those who don't understand it." - Florence Ambrose
typo: "cut morality" should be "cut mortality"
Thanks. My students know to expect Manningbrand typos. One reason my efforts at coding don't go so well.