5 ms·

Not really. As the top voted comment here says > A parallel that was not mentioned has to do with intellectual property. In the 19th century the US did not res

Not really. As the top voted comment here says > A parallel that was not mentioned has to do with intellectual property. In the 19th century the US did not respect foreign copyrights or patents; smuggled British machinery was cloned to produce the American industrial revolution, and Charles Dickens was the most popular author in the US but he didn't get a dime from American publishers, who could just take and print his works. I mean where was the railway invented for example.

WalterBright 2y ago
Yes, the US copied from England for some things. But the electric power industry, for example, came from Edison.
- surfpel 2y ago
  Ah yes, Thomas Edison, truly an example of not stealing inventions.
  - cryptonector 2y ago
    The topic being domestic inventions...
    - surfpel 2y ago
      Edisons contribution was to capitalize on the discoveries/inventions of Volta, Faraday, Siemens, Gramme, and Tesla, helping to popularize and push electricity into the market. Not insignificant certainly, but if we're talking about doing the actual inventing here, I don't think that supports the thesis.
      - WalterBright 2y ago
        [flagged]
        surfpel 2y ago
        > Patented ideas he stole Things that were patented that he then stole, or things he patented that other people really originated at their core? Former is silly, but latter: Lightbulb, xray, moving camera, phonograph are some things that were originated by others and refined by him, but that are often completely attributed to him. Again, his contributions are not insignificant, but highly misleading in the spirit of the topic regarding China and the trope that they can’t invent new ideas but that America did. All ideas take lots of collaboration so it’s just wrong to make those kinds of statements. > won all cases You mean the patent office awarded him patents, not that he is the undisputed originator of the idea, surely? The legal complexity and resource hungry nature of the patent system makes this a pretty moot point. Even today, patents are largely pointless if you can’t wage a long drawn out legal battle. The robber baron era was not a more just time. Building the first electrical power grid is quite significant, yes, but still irrelevant, because the core tech is still non American. Many innovations must be made to take those foreign ideas and implement them, yes, but how is that different from what’s going on in China? The original claim is that they don’t invent anything, only copy. Its a common narrative that’s not only an untrue cope, but also blinds people to the fact that they are on a trajectory to surpass in innovation, in addition to implementation. And on the bandsaw, it’s very international as well.
        WalterBright 2y ago
        You might want to read a biography of Edison, not just a summary on the web. The one by Josephson is good, and goes into considerable detail. Edison did not invent a glowing wire, nor did he invent electric arc lamps. However, both of those were useless as light bulbs. Existing lightbulbs at the time were low voltage, high current. The lightbulbs didn't last very long, and so were useless. They also consumed enormous amounts of power. Edison's innovation was to go with high voltage, low current. This cut the power consumption way down. The next problem he had was the filament burning up. This problem he managed to solve with a vacuum pump. Voila! A long lasting, cheap, and cheap to operate, light bulb. This is why he received the credit for inventing the light bulb, as it was the first practical light bulb. This is why all the other patent suits against him on the invention failed. If you are interested, feel free to read the Josephson book which covers the patent suits. I don't think you can just dismiss them with Edison had the resources to defend his patents, nor can you dismiss them with the litigants being paupers. The litigants who didn't have money got money to pursue the patent cases from investors who knew that if they won the suit, they would get rich. Everyone was aware that an entire industry was up for grabs, and so they poured money into fighting Edison. These when on for many years. They had every opportunity to make their case(s). But Edison prevailed. As for the bandsaw, I said the invention of the circular saw revolutionized the lumber industry, and that invention was I think from the Amish. What Edison did was make things that were practical. BTW, Edison invented electronic vacuum tubes, but he failed to recognize what they would be good for. Would you say he invented the entire electronics industry up until 1960? I wouldn't. It was others who turned the vacuum tube into a practical and incredibly useful device. Edison invented the idea of a commercial invention lab, and produced so many practical inventions that revolutionized life that he is a contender for inventing the modern world. It's hard to understate his impact. Interestingly, the Wright Brothers inadvertently invented the modern directed research and development laboratory. I'm probably the only person who ascribes that to them, but before the Wrights, people just tried random things (including Edison). What the Wrights did was: 1. research everything known about the topic 2. identify each problem that needed solving 3. develop prototypes to test and solve each problem 4. put the solutions together to solve the whole problem and voila! it worked! and everybody else has followed that pattern since.
      - cryptonector 2y ago
        [flagged]
        surfpel 2y ago
        I’m not really sure what’s being argued here? The concept of a light bulb existed. That’s pretty definitive to me. There was even a dispute he had to settle about it. > thought up the idea of doing that search Come on now…
- cryptonector 2y ago
  As did the steamboat, the telephone industry, the telegraph before that, and much more.
- klelatti 2y ago
  The point is that the US got a huge jump start in 19C from copying - and often improving - other countries technology. Sure lots of fundamental inventions - like Edison came at the end of that period but it doesn’t negate the jump start. So ‘the US invented its technology’ really doesn’t describe the position accurately. Nor is the contrast with China as stark as you imply.
- defrost 2y ago
  Robert Hammond beat Edison to starting a formal electric power supply company by a few months and continued on for a number of years after Edison's first effort folded.
  - WalterBright 2y ago
    The Pearl Street station began in 1881 and was delivering power to customers in 1882. It was far more advanced than Hammond's which strung a few overhead wires to arc lamps, and Hammond's work never went further and was a dead end. Edison's company evolved into General Electric. By 1884 it was serving 508 customers with 10,164 lamps at 110V. see "Edison" by Josephson starting page 251 Quoting from page 256: More than fifty years had passed since Michael Faraday had discovered the mechanical production of induced electricity and had been possessed by a vision of the future electric power. It needed Edison, however, as well as Faraday, Ampere, Arago, and other scientific explorers, to make the Electrical Age. "Scientists and inventors have more in common than in difference," James G. Crowther has written in discussing the relation of invention to science. A Faraday might discover far more new scientific facts than Edison, and in this their roles were different. "But the importance of Faraday's discoveries cannot be explained without reference to the work of Edison... This is why Edison is truly a 'man of science.'"83 It was Edison who had finally applied the knowledge of electrical science that had been accumulating during those fifty years in a decisive form (his "system") and boldly imposed it upon the "new" commodity, electricity, which thereafter was introduced to practical usage on a large scale. Thenceforth, the mass production and sale of electric current was to be carried on in all the world's markets. His successful carbon filament lamp, taken together with his System of electrical distribution, constituted the key invention in this technological drama. More than any other individual, he gave impetus to the advance of this new art, creating new wealth immeasurable, new convenience and enjoyment, and a new tempo of life.

WalterBright 2y ago

Yes, the US copied from England for some things. But the electric power industry, for example, came from Edison.

surfpel 2y ago
Ah yes, Thomas Edison, truly an example of not stealing inventions.
- cryptonector 2y ago
  The topic being domestic inventions...
  - surfpel 2y ago
    Edisons contribution was to capitalize on the discoveries/inventions of Volta, Faraday, Siemens, Gramme, and Tesla, helping to popularize and push electricity into the market. Not insignificant certainly, but if we're talking about doing the actual inventing here, I don't think that supports the thesis.
    - WalterBright 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - surfpel 2y ago
        > Patented ideas he stole Things that were patented that he then stole, or things he patented that other people really originated at their core? Former is silly, but latter: Lightbulb, xray, moving camera, phonograph are some things that were originated by others and refined by him, but that are often completely attributed to him. Again, his contributions are not insignificant, but highly misleading in the spirit of the topic regarding China and the trope that they can’t invent new ideas but that America did. All ideas take lots of collaboration so it’s just wrong to make those kinds of statements. > won all cases You mean the patent office awarded him patents, not that he is the undisputed originator of the idea, surely? The legal complexity and resource hungry nature of the patent system makes this a pretty moot point. Even today, patents are largely pointless if you can’t wage a long drawn out legal battle. The robber baron era was not a more just time. Building the first electrical power grid is quite significant, yes, but still irrelevant, because the core tech is still non American. Many innovations must be made to take those foreign ideas and implement them, yes, but how is that different from what’s going on in China? The original claim is that they don’t invent anything, only copy. Its a common narrative that’s not only an untrue cope, but also blinds people to the fact that they are on a trajectory to surpass in innovation, in addition to implementation. And on the bandsaw, it’s very international as well.
        WalterBright 2y ago
        You might want to read a biography of Edison, not just a summary on the web. The one by Josephson is good, and goes into considerable detail. Edison did not invent a glowing wire, nor did he invent electric arc lamps. However, both of those were useless as light bulbs. Existing lightbulbs at the time were low voltage, high current. The lightbulbs didn't last very long, and so were useless. They also consumed enormous amounts of power. Edison's innovation was to go with high voltage, low current. This cut the power consumption way down. The next problem he had was the filament burning up. This problem he managed to solve with a vacuum pump. Voila! A long lasting, cheap, and cheap to operate, light bulb. This is why he received the credit for inventing the light bulb, as it was the first practical light bulb. This is why all the other patent suits against him on the invention failed. If you are interested, feel free to read the Josephson book which covers the patent suits. I don't think you can just dismiss them with Edison had the resources to defend his patents, nor can you dismiss them with the litigants being paupers. The litigants who didn't have money got money to pursue the patent cases from investors who knew that if they won the suit, they would get rich. Everyone was aware that an entire industry was up for grabs, and so they poured money into fighting Edison. These when on for many years. They had every opportunity to make their case(s). But Edison prevailed. As for the bandsaw, I said the invention of the circular saw revolutionized the lumber industry, and that invention was I think from the Amish. What Edison did was make things that were practical. BTW, Edison invented electronic vacuum tubes, but he failed to recognize what they would be good for. Would you say he invented the entire electronics industry up until 1960? I wouldn't. It was others who turned the vacuum tube into a practical and incredibly useful device. Edison invented the idea of a commercial invention lab, and produced so many practical inventions that revolutionized life that he is a contender for inventing the modern world. It's hard to understate his impact. Interestingly, the Wright Brothers inadvertently invented the modern directed research and development laboratory. I'm probably the only person who ascribes that to them, but before the Wrights, people just tried random things (including Edison). What the Wrights did was: 1. research everything known about the topic 2. identify each problem that needed solving 3. develop prototypes to test and solve each problem 4. put the solutions together to solve the whole problem and voila! it worked! and everybody else has followed that pattern since.
    - cryptonector 2y ago
      [flagged]
      - surfpel 2y ago
        I’m not really sure what’s being argued here? The concept of a light bulb existed. That’s pretty definitive to me. There was even a dispute he had to settle about it. > thought up the idea of doing that search Come on now…
cryptonector 2y ago
As did the steamboat, the telephone industry, the telegraph before that, and much more.
klelatti 2y ago
The point is that the US got a huge jump start in 19C from copying - and often improving - other countries technology. Sure lots of fundamental inventions - like Edison came at the end of that period but it doesn’t negate the jump start. So ‘the US invented its technology’ really doesn’t describe the position accurately. Nor is the contrast with China as stark as you imply.
defrost 2y ago
Robert Hammond beat Edison to starting a formal electric power supply company by a few months and continued on for a number of years after Edison's first effort folded.
- WalterBright 2y ago
  The Pearl Street station began in 1881 and was delivering power to customers in 1882. It was far more advanced than Hammond's which strung a few overhead wires to arc lamps, and Hammond's work never went further and was a dead end. Edison's company evolved into General Electric. By 1884 it was serving 508 customers with 10,164 lamps at 110V. see "Edison" by Josephson starting page 251 Quoting from page 256: More than fifty years had passed since Michael Faraday had discovered the mechanical production of induced electricity and had been possessed by a vision of the future electric power. It needed Edison, however, as well as Faraday, Ampere, Arago, and other scientific explorers, to make the Electrical Age. "Scientists and inventors have more in common than in difference," James G. Crowther has written in discussing the relation of invention to science. A Faraday might discover far more new scientific facts than Edison, and in this their roles were different. "But the importance of Faraday's discoveries cannot be explained without reference to the work of Edison... This is why Edison is truly a 'man of science.'"83 It was Edison who had finally applied the knowledge of electrical science that had been accumulating during those fifty years in a decisive form (his "system") and boldly imposed it upon the "new" commodity, electricity, which thereafter was introduced to practical usage on a large scale. Thenceforth, the mass production and sale of electric current was to be carried on in all the world's markets. His successful carbon filament lamp, taken together with his System of electrical distribution, constituted the key invention in this technological drama. More than any other individual, he gave impetus to the advance of this new art, creating new wealth immeasurable, new convenience and enjoyment, and a new tempo of life.