3 ms·
Likewise, the silicon valley boom happened via massive ecological damage to the surrounding environments. The linked article seems to argue against itself in p
by com2kid 4y ago
Likewise, the silicon valley boom happened via massive ecological damage to the surrounding environments.
The linked article seems to argue against itself in places, a surplus of labor is argued to be both good and bad.
I've seen arguments that the Roman empire never underwent an industrial revolution because they had slavery, and thus never needed to automate. The Romans did the resource extraction part right, but never iterated on it to the next step.
- tyre 4y agoThe Romans never had access to coal, which was the energy-dense fuel that made the Industrial Revolution possible. Bret Devereaux has a (long) post on this, which I recommend: https://acoup.blog/2022/08/26/collections-why-no-roman-industrial-revolution/ https://acoup.blog/2022/08/26/collections-why-no-roman-indus...
- Manuel_D 4y agoIt wasn't just access to coal, it was access to coal coupled with the heat engine: heat engines used coal, but led to the production of more coal and in turn created more demand for coal. This positive feedback loop created exponential growth. The Chinese widely used coal in metallurgy, but did not have an effective heat engine.
- emmelaich 4y agoRomans had access to coal, even mines. That acoup article says it's the demand for coal that made the difference.
- com2kid 4y agoIncredible post, thanks! I'll no repeated the incorrect assertion that the Romans could have had any hope of their own industrial revolution!
- tekla 4y ago[flagged]