3 ms·
this whole thing about information being more important than factories is a bit far-fetched. I did not manage to see the presentation, but I suppose it depends
by Andrew_Quentin 16y ago
this whole thing about information being more important than factories is a bit far-fetched.
I did not manage to see the presentation, but I suppose it depends as to how you define importance. We might always need farmers, wood smiths, brick layers. However, we know how to farm the land, build kitchens, houses. These things demand skill, but of a very low level.
Perhaps such things should not be placed in a hierarchical pyramid, but if they were, information would be right at the top. That is so as information, or rather innovation that comes from information and synthesis of information affects all that is below it in the hierarchy and is the hardest to get in that hierarchy.
- brc 16y ago>we know how to farm the land, build kitchens, houses. THese things demand skill, but of a very low level. You're being unnecessarily skill-ist here. I don't expect a farmer to build a website, and I certainly wouldn't know the first thing about bringing a wheat crop to market. Similarly, I've tried to build a kitchen and find that trained, experienced professional is the best input for that job. To suggest that there are no more improvements to be found in construction, agriculture and other primary industries is to be very dismissive of the people working hard in those industries. It's true that, say, programming requires a higher level of abstract thought and more mathematical-style skills. That's a different mix of skills than, say, a builder. But if you think you're better than that builder, you're just falling for cultural bias centered around universities that influence their undergraduates. Well, guess what, builders also talk around the site and consider themselves better than those who wasted their money at university. Neither is right.