3 ms·

It hasn't changed that much. In a lot of ways technology has put us into a Zen valley of unknowing. The only reason people rely on technology for 'order' is be

• hilbert42 3y ago
  "It is only through technology that you can destroy/disrupt so much past value in a short period of time and call it progress." Oh how true. I've spent much of my life as a technologist and occasionally I've been at its cutting edge. Yet there are few tech things that have truly improved my life. Most modern tech simply adds irrecoverable overhead to one's life—and one's life speeds up just through maintaining it. Some tech has had great potential to offer advantages but has fallen short in delivery though greed, lack of agreement on standards, planned obsolescence and indifference and abuse from users. Combined, synergies have rendered much tech disappointing and very suboptimal. I look at the many thousands of irrecoverable hours I've wasted on trying to make computers do what they're supposed to do and make software like Windows just simply work as expected—which it could have easily done if it were not for the greed and intransigence of Microsoft. And nowadays printers have evil intent thanks to the proprietary actions of Canon, Epson and others. These monstrous contraptions are so only because manufacturers spend so much time and effort at optimizing their profit, and it's users who foot the expence. Similarly, technology is too often used to abuse and inconvenience people. The article's photo of the Transport for London card only sign with the caption “You can use any shade of payment, as long as its digital" is nothing other than an abuse of technology, it's the sort of brazen technocratic instruction that would make me want to jump the barrier and say 'fuck you'. Yes, it's deeply sad to see wealth misused, especially so by the powerful. It's also terribly sad to read the words of younger generations and to know there's no way of putting wisdom onto young shoulders. It's through no fault of their own that imparting experience and wisdom to them is akin to explaining color to someone who's been blind from birth. Unfortunately, it's a terrible tragedy of the human condition that knowledge of this kind can only be bought with time.
  • smokel 3y ago
    The irony is that it required a lot of capitalism to reach this point in time where we got to see a glimpse of what might have been possible. Is the sad thing reality itself, or is the sad thing that one can envision a better reality which will never materialize?
    • hilbert42 3y ago
      Yes, I reckon that's true. What's more we've seen that glimpse from different perspectives—for starters by observing both the distant and recent past. It's a complex matter and there's no way I could provide a comprehensive summary here (and my history is very rusty), but some things stand out. At the height of the Industrial Revolution (say around 150 years ago) not all but a large percentage of capitalists were very proud of the products that their companies produced, for the era their quality was excellent and they lasted. Work conditions were pretty rotten but workers nevertheless turned out good high quality products and their guilds encouraged and maintained high standards of craft and workmanship. Now look back over the last 40—50 years and see how this has changed, production now favors profit over quality and product is essentially a means to an end. Yes, that's a pretty simplistic summary and no doubt historians will be shouting 'gross oversimplification' but I'll provide an illustration anyway. Not far from where I live there's a two-track railway viaduct built going on 150 years ago that's still in use. It's in two sections separated by land in the middle and in total it's over several miles long, and it's built entirely of standard bricks. The ground it traverses is mostly parklands so is easy to get up close and in parts one's able to stand under its arches. Over the years I've walked its entire length many times. What struck me years ago was the remarkable condition of the brickwork in that I could see there were no cracks anywhere and that included the mortar which is still in excellent condition, that's remarkable given that there must be millions of bricks. So I set myself a challenge of finding any cracks every time I walk there and to date I've found none. Now between the viaduct and my home there's been new low-rise developments in the last 30 years, new semi-detached, two-storey and similar which I walk past on my way to the parklands. Almost every one of these new dwellings has cracked brickwork and some of the brick fences have vertical cracks that don't zigzag along the mortar but rather have sheered completely through the bricks from top to bottom. What I've described here isn't an uncommon scenario, I've seen similar instances elsewhere. The question is why were Victorian bricklayers consistently able to build brick structures that remain faultless after 150 years whereas today's builders seemingly can't or won't. I'm not going to attempt to answer that except to say it's more than just capitalism at work, it's also has to do with changed ethics, different worldviews and changes in the movement of capital (and that's just hardly scratching the surface). (Incidentally, I've always taken an interest in how things were built. Several decades ago, before bans were in place to stop people walking over it (it's very dangerous), I spent many hours studying the masonry on the Roman Ponte du Gard viaduct. They say it was built mostly by slaves nevertheless the workmanship is just impeccable, I was simply awestruck by their craftsmanship.)