5 ms·

I know where they are assembled. I also know where the displays are actually manufactured, where the RAM comes from, and where the CPU is fabbed, and where the

by evgen 6y ago

I know where they are assembled. I also know where the displays are actually manufactured, where the RAM comes from, and where the CPU is fabbed, and where the various radio chips are sourced from. I also know where the software is written that makes it all work. I also know that the iPhone and Macbook are not particularly difficult pieces of engineering and that the tech required to make the shiny bit of tech you see in the store is the bit of the iceberg beneath the waterline that represents a lot of the value in what we are talking about.

michaelt 6y ago
> I also know that the iPhone and Macbook are not particularly difficult pieces of engineering https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman
- evgen 6y ago
  It is not a No True Scotsman fallacy, it is simply that the tech and machines/processes used to create the components are far more impressive and represent a more important tech base than the actual output from those processes. If we want to trade vaguely related aphorisms: “Amateurs talk tactics, professionals talk logistics.” The tip of the spear is less impressive than the logistical tail that makes it possible.
  - salawat 6y ago
    This. I've always been most fascinated by industrial machinery and process engineering more so than the end result of it. It's that piece that represents the Golden egg of industry; and like it or not, the capability to keep the people of your country employed making widget X, receiving paychecks, etc is valuable. Incredibly so. Possibly even more valuable than the money it makes as the know-how it takes to have formulated that process stand-up is nearly impossible to codify, and closer to a luck based emergent outcome than anything you can plan for. Similar, if you'll excuse the long-jump analogy to how all the enzymatic processes our cells must undergo to live and thrive are all based on a fundamentally chaotic process; diffusion.

by evgen 6y ago

michaelt 6y ago

> I also know that the iPhone and Macbook are not particularly difficult pieces of engineering https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

evgen 6y ago
It is not a No True Scotsman fallacy, it is simply that the tech and machines/processes used to create the components are far more impressive and represent a more important tech base than the actual output from those processes. If we want to trade vaguely related aphorisms: “Amateurs talk tactics, professionals talk logistics.” The tip of the spear is less impressive than the logistical tail that makes it possible.
- salawat 6y ago
  This. I've always been most fascinated by industrial machinery and process engineering more so than the end result of it. It's that piece that represents the Golden egg of industry; and like it or not, the capability to keep the people of your country employed making widget X, receiving paychecks, etc is valuable. Incredibly so. Possibly even more valuable than the money it makes as the know-how it takes to have formulated that process stand-up is nearly impossible to codify, and closer to a luck based emergent outcome than anything you can plan for. Similar, if you'll excuse the long-jump analogy to how all the enzymatic processes our cells must undergo to live and thrive are all based on a fundamentally chaotic process; diffusion.