3 ms·

Perhaps worth remembering that 'over-enthusiasm' for new technologies dates back to (at least) canal-mania: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_Revol

Perhaps worth remembering that 'over-enthusiasm' for new technologies dates back to (at least) canal-mania: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_Revolutions_and_Financial_Capital https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_Revolutions_and_... * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canal_Mania https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canal_Mania

leojfc 1y ago
Absolutely. Years ago I found this book on the topic really eye-opening: - https://www.amazon.co.uk/Technological-Revolutions-Financial-Capital-Dynamics/dp/1843763311/ https://www.amazon.co.uk/Technological-Revolutions-Financial... The process of _actually_ benefitting from technological improvements is not a straight line, and often requires some external intervention. e.g. it’s interesting to note that the rising power of specific groups of workers as a result of industrialisation + unionisation then arguably led to things like the 5-day week and the 8-hour day. I think if (if!) there’s a positive version of what comes from all this, it’s that the same dynamic might emerge. There’s already lots more WFH of course, and some experiments with 4-day weeks. But a lot of resistance too.
- _heimdall 1y ago
  My understanding is that the 40 hour work week (and similar) was talked about for centuries by workers groups but only became a thing once governments during WWI found that longer days didn't necessarily increase output proportionally. For a 4 day week to really happen st scale, I'd expect we similarly need the government to decide to roll it out rather than workers groups pushing it from the bottom up.
  - throw0101d 1y ago
    > My understanding is that the 40 hour work week (and similar) was talked about for […] See perhaps: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-hour_day_movement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-hour_day_movement Generally it only really started being talked about when "workers" became a thing, specifically with the Industrial Revolution. Before that a good portion of work was either agricultural or domestic, so talk of 'shifts' didn't really make much sense.
    - _heimdall 1y ago
      Oh sure, a standard shift doesn't make much sense unless you're an employee. My point was specifically about the 40 hour standard we use now though. We didn't get a 40-hour week because workers demanded it, we got it because wartime governments decided that was the "right" balance of labor and output.
- throw0101d 1y ago
  > https://www.amazon.co.uk/Technological-Revolutions-Financial-Capital-Dynamics/dp/1843763311/ https://www.amazon.co.uk/Technological-Revolutions-Financial... Yes, that is the first link of my/GP post.
idiotsecant 1y ago
Importantly, however, canals did end up changing the world. Most new tech is like that - a period of mania, followed by a long tail of actual adoption where the world quietly changes
foofoo12 1y ago
There's a good podcast on the Suez and Panama canal: https://omny.fm/shows/cautionary-tales-with-tim-harford/the-great-frenchmans-folly-panama-disaster-1 https://omny.fm/shows/cautionary-tales-with-tim-harford/the-...

leojfc 1y ago

Absolutely. Years ago I found this book on the topic really eye-opening: - https://www.amazon.co.uk/Technological-Revolutions-Financial-Capital-Dynamics/dp/1843763311/ https://www.amazon.co.uk/Technological-Revolutions-Financial... The process of _actually_ benefitting from technological improvements is not a straight line, and often requires some external intervention. e.g. it’s interesting to note that the rising power of specific groups of workers as a result of industrialisation + unionisation then arguably led to things like the 5-day week and the 8-hour day. I think if (if!) there’s a positive version of what comes from all this, it’s that the same dynamic might emerge. There’s already lots more WFH of course, and some experiments with 4-day weeks. But a lot of resistance too.

_heimdall 1y ago
My understanding is that the 40 hour work week (and similar) was talked about for centuries by workers groups but only became a thing once governments during WWI found that longer days didn't necessarily increase output proportionally. For a 4 day week to really happen st scale, I'd expect we similarly need the government to decide to roll it out rather than workers groups pushing it from the bottom up.
- throw0101d 1y ago
  > My understanding is that the 40 hour work week (and similar) was talked about for […] See perhaps: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-hour_day_movement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-hour_day_movement Generally it only really started being talked about when "workers" became a thing, specifically with the Industrial Revolution. Before that a good portion of work was either agricultural or domestic, so talk of 'shifts' didn't really make much sense.
  - _heimdall 1y ago
    Oh sure, a standard shift doesn't make much sense unless you're an employee. My point was specifically about the 40 hour standard we use now though. We didn't get a 40-hour week because workers demanded it, we got it because wartime governments decided that was the "right" balance of labor and output.
throw0101d 1y ago
> https://www.amazon.co.uk/Technological-Revolutions-Financial-Capital-Dynamics/dp/1843763311/ https://www.amazon.co.uk/Technological-Revolutions-Financial... Yes, that is the first link of my/GP post.

idiotsecant 1y ago

Importantly, however, canals did end up changing the world. Most new tech is like that - a period of mania, followed by a long tail of actual adoption where the world quietly changes

foofoo12 1y ago

There's a good podcast on the Suez and Panama canal: https://omny.fm/shows/cautionary-tales-with-tim-harford/the-great-frenchmans-folly-panama-disaster-1 https://omny.fm/shows/cautionary-tales-with-tim-harford/the-...