Most Tech Today Would be Frivolous to Ancient Scientists
May 29, 2019 3:45 AM Subscribe
Much modern technology is built off ancient technologies and in many cases, we still don’t understand how they did certain things they did: We’ve not yet regained their knowledge. A major difference between ancient technology and modern tech is that the latter is industry-driven, whereas ancient technologies never were. As a result, modern tech is designed not necessarily for use value—much modern tech is entirely frivolous—but for a consumer market, and is designed for early obsolescence. Luxury tech must become unusable as swiftly as the consumer will tolerate. Can you imagine an aqueduct that needed to be replaced every 18 months?
I honestly don't believe in planned obsolescence. If you pay for high quality, things last. Consumers have, time and again, shown a preference for cheaper items, but this isn't a new thing. We had cheap stuff 200 years ago and expensive stuff that lasted, but the cheap stuff is long gone, so no one remembers that.
Computers and technology advance fast enough that perhaps they're not building that stuff to work for decades, but on the flip side, we've got my wife's Sega Genesis in our living room. It's not obsolete in so far as it still works just as well as 25 years ago.
posted by explosion at 4:36 AM on May 29, 2019 [5 favorites]
Computers and technology advance fast enough that perhaps they're not building that stuff to work for decades, but on the flip side, we've got my wife's Sega Genesis in our living room. It's not obsolete in so far as it still works just as well as 25 years ago.
posted by explosion at 4:36 AM on May 29, 2019 [5 favorites]
Looks like the site is broken on mobile. Desktop view works fine.
Unable to select the specified database: nautilus_prodposted by zamboni at 4:40 AM on May 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
Filename: /var/www/html/prod/src/application/libraries/MX/Base.php
Line Number: 55
chasles: "Link is dead for me"
Talk about rapid obsolescence...
posted by chavenet at 4:43 AM on May 29, 2019 [21 favorites]
Talk about rapid obsolescence...
posted by chavenet at 4:43 AM on May 29, 2019 [21 favorites]
[...] Stroup notes that the Greeks explored space by naked eye [...]
Axe ground, down to its wooden handle.
Ethics is a Greek invention.
Oh, a professor of classics *AND* Greco-Roman supremacist studies. She must be busy!
posted by Humanzee at 4:56 AM on May 29, 2019 [17 favorites]
Axe ground, down to its wooden handle.
Ethics is a Greek invention.
Oh, a professor of classics *AND* Greco-Roman supremacist studies. She must be busy!
posted by Humanzee at 4:56 AM on May 29, 2019 [17 favorites]
It's a bad idea to get too hung up on one thing a person says and to think that ought to count against their whole point, but: Stroup has a degree in philosophy and believes that ethics started with Aristotle?
I mean, there was this pretty famous dude, Aristotle's teacher, no less, who is pretty well known for working in Ethics (not to mention that dude's mentor).
posted by oddman at 5:02 AM on May 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
I mean, there was this pretty famous dude, Aristotle's teacher, no less, who is pretty well known for working in Ethics (not to mention that dude's mentor).
posted by oddman at 5:02 AM on May 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
This piece seems like a serious reach.
Agreed. While ancient Greek automatons were surely impressive and are often underestimated by modern people, there's a big step between those and a factory where many machines work to make more machines, even pre-computing factories with significant human operation.
Can you imagine an aqueduct that needed to be replaced every 18 months?
Nope, which is why we build water mains to last.
In your talk, you noted the Greeks used a recyclable material, bronze. What would they have thought about our global dependence on plastic, a material used once, then discarded, but never again to go away?
I believe they would be absolutely appalled.
Maybe, though also impressed at all the cool stuff you can do with plastic that you can't with bronze.
posted by timdiggerm at 5:03 AM on May 29, 2019 [12 favorites]
Agreed. While ancient Greek automatons were surely impressive and are often underestimated by modern people, there's a big step between those and a factory where many machines work to make more machines, even pre-computing factories with significant human operation.
Can you imagine an aqueduct that needed to be replaced every 18 months?
Nope, which is why we build water mains to last.
In your talk, you noted the Greeks used a recyclable material, bronze. What would they have thought about our global dependence on plastic, a material used once, then discarded, but never again to go away?
I believe they would be absolutely appalled.
Maybe, though also impressed at all the cool stuff you can do with plastic that you can't with bronze.
posted by timdiggerm at 5:03 AM on May 29, 2019 [12 favorites]
Ancient civilisations engaged in planned obsolescence too:
At the height of the Empire, an impressive 18,000 metric tons of olive oil, along with 8,000 metric tons of clay amphorae, were imported annually from Hispania to Rome. The oil was stored in warehouses along the east bank of the Tiber and the clay discarded out back; each year over 280,000 amphorae were smashed and deposited in a series of raised terraces that became Monte Testaccio.
That's not "high tech" but it shows that even then manufactured objects could be seen as disposable if they were cheap enough to produce (ie mass-produced) and too costly to recycle.
posted by elgilito at 5:04 AM on May 29, 2019 [16 favorites]
At the height of the Empire, an impressive 18,000 metric tons of olive oil, along with 8,000 metric tons of clay amphorae, were imported annually from Hispania to Rome. The oil was stored in warehouses along the east bank of the Tiber and the clay discarded out back; each year over 280,000 amphorae were smashed and deposited in a series of raised terraces that became Monte Testaccio.
That's not "high tech" but it shows that even then manufactured objects could be seen as disposable if they were cheap enough to produce (ie mass-produced) and too costly to recycle.
posted by elgilito at 5:04 AM on May 29, 2019 [16 favorites]
You wouldn't download an aqueduct. That's ethics!
posted by thelonius at 5:05 AM on May 29, 2019 [52 favorites]
posted by thelonius at 5:05 AM on May 29, 2019 [52 favorites]
If one had insisted on sufficient quality they'd be able to go on their morning run with a Walkman tape player or added an HD conversion interface for their super robust quality Black and White Television console! (but it'd still be in B&W) On a bigger scale, Bostons Big Dig reinvigorated the downtown area, it's wonderfully walkable but the dreary/scary viaduct would never have been replaced if it had not literally been rotting and falling down (they had to close one section for emergency repairs months before scheduled demolition).
Building to last seems to make sense but perhaps not so much with the current short term mindset of designers. Recycle the world.
posted by sammyo at 5:18 AM on May 29, 2019
Building to last seems to make sense but perhaps not so much with the current short term mindset of designers. Recycle the world.
posted by sammyo at 5:18 AM on May 29, 2019
The main thing the students learn is how difficult it is to build these things. You spend nine weeks trying to build a catapult—with access to a huge workshop and electric tools, and you can use nylon cord—and it still barely launches a ball more than ten feet. Suddenly the past doesn’t seem so laughably simplistic.
Or you just can't find good wood anymore even for a price. Give me a knotless 12x12 oak beam bent 60 degrees an it'll launch a boulder a lot more than ten feet!
But the real point is really important, old tech was effective and sophisticated, learn to caulk a well faired wooden hull. An old boat guy will slowly, methodically get it right, rushed with a young expert, you have a a poor submarine.
posted by sammyo at 5:36 AM on May 29, 2019 [2 favorites]
Or you just can't find good wood anymore even for a price. Give me a knotless 12x12 oak beam bent 60 degrees an it'll launch a boulder a lot more than ten feet!
But the real point is really important, old tech was effective and sophisticated, learn to caulk a well faired wooden hull. An old boat guy will slowly, methodically get it right, rushed with a young expert, you have a a poor submarine.
posted by sammyo at 5:36 AM on May 29, 2019 [2 favorites]
a well faired wooden hull
what does it mean for a hull to be "well faired"?
posted by thelonius at 5:47 AM on May 29, 2019
what does it mean for a hull to be "well faired"?
posted by thelonius at 5:47 AM on May 29, 2019
“Planned obsolescence” feels like this “old man yells at cloud” sort of phrase that I associate mostly with people upset that batteries won’t hold a charge forever, or that they have to replace their toothbrush and sandpaper sometimes
posted by DoctorFedora at 6:01 AM on May 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by DoctorFedora at 6:01 AM on May 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
Fairing a hull refers to making it smooth and even, and can refer to doing so during construction or when fixing damage.
posted by Wretch729 at 6:08 AM on May 29, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by Wretch729 at 6:08 AM on May 29, 2019 [2 favorites]
After reading the comments I'm not going to bother reading the article, but I just want to note that planned obsolescence absolutely exists and is often achieved by not providing the end user a viable way to service the product, which results in first malfunction being also the final one.
posted by hat_eater at 6:30 AM on May 29, 2019 [12 favorites]
posted by hat_eater at 6:30 AM on May 29, 2019 [12 favorites]
The ancients created robots because ... they had some stories that if we squint at them ... robots! In fairness, a professor gets used to being oracular in a setting where any potential critics are depending on a grade, and hence restrained and polite. Then they give an interview that gets discussed on the intertoobs.
posted by Gilgamesh's Chauffeur at 6:37 AM on May 29, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by Gilgamesh's Chauffeur at 6:37 AM on May 29, 2019 [2 favorites]
Failing to design durability into a product is indistinguishable from planned obsolescence.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 7:09 AM on May 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by Kirth Gerson at 7:09 AM on May 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
Besides everything else others noted, this piece seems incredibly eurocentric to me. No mention of the contributions of the ancient scientists of the Arab world, or India?
posted by peacheater at 7:24 AM on May 29, 2019 [5 favorites]
posted by peacheater at 7:24 AM on May 29, 2019 [5 favorites]
While I feel for what Stroup is saying, she is pushing it way too far, as others have already noted. Statements like "they had developed atomic theory, and I don’t think they were too far away from being able to control electricity" show that the scholar has a very sketchy understanding of modern technology and science.
*Steam* power as a basic concept including working prototypes, was already discovered in Alexandria in Hellenistic times (see Hero's engine), but that it was never utilized as a technology until the industrial revolution shows that there is more to technological adaptation than knowing about something, or even being able to craft prototypes. Technological innovation is a function of social organization and systems of production at least as much, and probably more, than they are simply fruits of knowledge or scientific inquiry.
Now planned obsolescence (PO) is something well worth debating about today, but it simply could never be an issue in societies where the material base was vastly more underdeveloped and capitalism as we know it, which is the root cause of PO, could never exist...
Oh and plastic would be concidered a miracle material in ancient times. No maybes. Most tech today would seem like magic to ancient scientists...
posted by talos at 7:26 AM on May 29, 2019 [2 favorites]
*Steam* power as a basic concept including working prototypes, was already discovered in Alexandria in Hellenistic times (see Hero's engine), but that it was never utilized as a technology until the industrial revolution shows that there is more to technological adaptation than knowing about something, or even being able to craft prototypes. Technological innovation is a function of social organization and systems of production at least as much, and probably more, than they are simply fruits of knowledge or scientific inquiry.
Now planned obsolescence (PO) is something well worth debating about today, but it simply could never be an issue in societies where the material base was vastly more underdeveloped and capitalism as we know it, which is the root cause of PO, could never exist...
Oh and plastic would be concidered a miracle material in ancient times. No maybes. Most tech today would seem like magic to ancient scientists...
posted by talos at 7:26 AM on May 29, 2019 [2 favorites]
Besides everything else others noted, this piece seems incredibly eurocentric to me. No mention of the contributions of the ancient scientists of the Arab world, or India?
Well, no, that is not what the course was about, it seems.
posted by thelonius at 7:32 AM on May 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
Well, no, that is not what the course was about, it seems.
posted by thelonius at 7:32 AM on May 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
from TFA: "my background is in the sciences and that’s what I had planned to study in university. I read in the sciences, I design and build high power rockets, I adore math. As it happened, I stumbled into philosophy and Greek, the first two things to challenge me, and so I ended up staying here."
Not even humble-, just plain bragging. Also, the whole course seems eurocentric and part of that weird narrative that the Greeks invented everything, the Romans took care of it and here we are! Would have been standard in 1819, I guess, but you expect a little more nuance nowadays.
posted by signal at 7:59 AM on May 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
Not even humble-, just plain bragging. Also, the whole course seems eurocentric and part of that weird narrative that the Greeks invented everything, the Romans took care of it and here we are! Would have been standard in 1819, I guess, but you expect a little more nuance nowadays.
posted by signal at 7:59 AM on May 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
Can you imagine an aqueduct that needed to be replaced every 18 months?
Well, no, but I can't really imagine a hydroelectric power plant that needs to be replaced every 18 months either. Got any apples to compare to those apples?
posted by Naberius at 8:19 AM on May 29, 2019 [4 favorites]
Well, no, but I can't really imagine a hydroelectric power plant that needs to be replaced every 18 months either. Got any apples to compare to those apples?
posted by Naberius at 8:19 AM on May 29, 2019 [4 favorites]
I think there's a big difference between crying "planned obsolescence!" when phone batteries die versus when dishwashers, refrigerators, and other major appliances die within six months of the warranty expiring. Used to be you'd buy a fridge and it would last as long as your house. Now you're lucky if it lasts five years.
Or so my elders tell me, at least.
posted by Grither at 8:32 AM on May 29, 2019
Or so my elders tell me, at least.
posted by Grither at 8:32 AM on May 29, 2019
Grither: A lot of "They don't build 'em like they used to" is just survivorship bias. There's plenty of broken fridges and dishwashers from those glory days that don't work anymore, or only work because someone went in and fixed them at some point along the way. Possibly multiple points.
Now, the lack of user or even technician serviceability on modern devices is definitely cause for some concern.
posted by SansPoint at 8:35 AM on May 29, 2019 [2 favorites]
Now, the lack of user or even technician serviceability on modern devices is definitely cause for some concern.
posted by SansPoint at 8:35 AM on May 29, 2019 [2 favorites]
Oh and plastic would be concidered a miracle material in ancient times. No maybes.
As evidence, here's a probably-false story in which an ancient Roman has invented plastic and everyone is amazed. He is then killed.
posted by timdiggerm at 8:51 AM on May 29, 2019
As evidence, here's a probably-false story in which an ancient Roman has invented plastic and everyone is amazed. He is then killed.
posted by timdiggerm at 8:51 AM on May 29, 2019
Used to be you'd buy a fridge and it would last as long as your house.
That's not exactly planned obsolescence, that cheapness too. From the 1979 Sears catalog, they'd sell you a basic 17 ft3 fridge with an icemaker for $470, or about $1600 in current dollars. They'll sell you a functionally-identical* one now (admittedly on a notional sale) for $580, or about $170 in 1979 dollars.
People being what they are, I expect that a basic white top-freezer fridge with no features except an inside-the-freezer ice maker for $1600 would be a tough sell, even if you or I might kinda like one.
*The new one will almost certainly be way more energy-efficient in addition to breaking sooner
posted by GCU Sweet and Full of Grace at 8:54 AM on May 29, 2019 [2 favorites]
That's not exactly planned obsolescence, that cheapness too. From the 1979 Sears catalog, they'd sell you a basic 17 ft3 fridge with an icemaker for $470, or about $1600 in current dollars. They'll sell you a functionally-identical* one now (admittedly on a notional sale) for $580, or about $170 in 1979 dollars.
People being what they are, I expect that a basic white top-freezer fridge with no features except an inside-the-freezer ice maker for $1600 would be a tough sell, even if you or I might kinda like one.
*The new one will almost certainly be way more energy-efficient in addition to breaking sooner
posted by GCU Sweet and Full of Grace at 8:54 AM on May 29, 2019 [2 favorites]
Plastic? Imagine showing the ancient Greeks fiberglass. People just don't know how much work wooden boats are, especially if you haven't learned to copper their hulls.
posted by BeeDo at 8:59 AM on May 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by BeeDo at 8:59 AM on May 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
Is there any research about disposable items of the ancient Mediterranean societies? My initial thought, and continuing thought after reading the article, was that by their nature disposable items wouldn't make it as long as stuff designed to last (an aqueduct ) or things that are stored for posterity (war machines and prized artifacts). Surely someone must study the more every-day disposable stuff, right?
posted by codacorolla at 9:03 AM on May 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by codacorolla at 9:03 AM on May 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
Ooooh, this sort of stuff really tweaks my gourd.
we still don’t understand how they did certain things they did: We’ve not yet regained their knowledge.
Such as? It's a common misconception that there are lost arts and forgotten knowledge evidenced by artefacts and documents, a misconception that is easy to hold until you talk to the relevant experts. There's a great Youtube channel, Clickspring, where someone is recreating the Antikythera mechanism using the tools, materials and techniques known to have been available at the time and place it was thought to have been created. It's extremely cool and very satisfying to watch, but nothing esoteric in the generally accepted context of that period of history.
Likewise, the 'atomic theory was Greek' stuff - not really. It was one of very many ideas of the time that didn't and couldn't lead anywhere, that we now know to be true. Likewise Thales of Miletus, who thought that the effect of rubbing amber on fur and the attraction of magnetic stones were possibly connected, because they both exhibited attraction with no apparent connection: the birth of electromagnetism? Not really, we had to go through the best part of two thousand years of Aristotelian thought before the Enlightenment shifted the culture to the point where Faraday and Maxwell could look at the same stuff and actually turn it into actionable knowledge. We didn't lose the knowledge of the ancients.
As for planned obsolescence - I have stood on top of a fifty-foot-plus pile of Bronze Age sherds in Israel at Tel Lachish, one of very many such monumental spoil tips of disposable tech. That's what the materials science of the day provided. You could make your domestic wares out of recyclable bronze, but why would you? Bronze was extremely expensive, extremely useful for things that ceramics couldn't do, difficult to create but easy to recycle - of course it got recycled. That wasn't some deep wisdom, that was plain practicality.
And unless I miss my guess, I'm typing this in a room lit by solid-state LED light bulbs that probably won't need replacing for ten years, if not more, whereas in the last century I was replacing light bulbs all the time.
I fear our correspondent has been somewhat blind-sided by living through Moore's Law (now rescinded), where 'planned obsolescence' wasn't some daft modern frippery but a period of very rapid techniological advancement. This year's model does twice as much, costs half as much, as that from two years ago. What are you expected to do? Hell, I remember any number of 1980s and 1990s computers, even mobile phones, with 'obsolescence designed out', which were more expensive and lesseasy to upgrade than their peers. And on the other hand, I have a fine collection of multi-decade old radios all of which work fine and all of which I still use.
There are plenty of good and valid criticisms of misuse of technology and lack of care designing for long-term results - those darn Airbuds - but that's not because we've lost some ancient wisdom. It's worse: we know far more than they ever did, and still we follow the path of least resistance.
posted by Devonian at 9:06 AM on May 29, 2019 [11 favorites]
we still don’t understand how they did certain things they did: We’ve not yet regained their knowledge.
Such as? It's a common misconception that there are lost arts and forgotten knowledge evidenced by artefacts and documents, a misconception that is easy to hold until you talk to the relevant experts. There's a great Youtube channel, Clickspring, where someone is recreating the Antikythera mechanism using the tools, materials and techniques known to have been available at the time and place it was thought to have been created. It's extremely cool and very satisfying to watch, but nothing esoteric in the generally accepted context of that period of history.
Likewise, the 'atomic theory was Greek' stuff - not really. It was one of very many ideas of the time that didn't and couldn't lead anywhere, that we now know to be true. Likewise Thales of Miletus, who thought that the effect of rubbing amber on fur and the attraction of magnetic stones were possibly connected, because they both exhibited attraction with no apparent connection: the birth of electromagnetism? Not really, we had to go through the best part of two thousand years of Aristotelian thought before the Enlightenment shifted the culture to the point where Faraday and Maxwell could look at the same stuff and actually turn it into actionable knowledge. We didn't lose the knowledge of the ancients.
As for planned obsolescence - I have stood on top of a fifty-foot-plus pile of Bronze Age sherds in Israel at Tel Lachish, one of very many such monumental spoil tips of disposable tech. That's what the materials science of the day provided. You could make your domestic wares out of recyclable bronze, but why would you? Bronze was extremely expensive, extremely useful for things that ceramics couldn't do, difficult to create but easy to recycle - of course it got recycled. That wasn't some deep wisdom, that was plain practicality.
And unless I miss my guess, I'm typing this in a room lit by solid-state LED light bulbs that probably won't need replacing for ten years, if not more, whereas in the last century I was replacing light bulbs all the time.
I fear our correspondent has been somewhat blind-sided by living through Moore's Law (now rescinded), where 'planned obsolescence' wasn't some daft modern frippery but a period of very rapid techniological advancement. This year's model does twice as much, costs half as much, as that from two years ago. What are you expected to do? Hell, I remember any number of 1980s and 1990s computers, even mobile phones, with 'obsolescence designed out', which were more expensive and lesseasy to upgrade than their peers. And on the other hand, I have a fine collection of multi-decade old radios all of which work fine and all of which I still use.
There are plenty of good and valid criticisms of misuse of technology and lack of care designing for long-term results - those darn Airbuds - but that's not because we've lost some ancient wisdom. It's worse: we know far more than they ever did, and still we follow the path of least resistance.
posted by Devonian at 9:06 AM on May 29, 2019 [11 favorites]
I agree with most of you, but that Lycurgus Cup with nano-particles affecting its color is pretty cool though
posted by numaner at 9:11 AM on May 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by numaner at 9:11 AM on May 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
I'm a big proponent of celebrating ancient and non-European science. We don't do either enough in college classes. But Archimedes' death ray has nothing to do with lasers. The Greeks didn't invent atomic theory in any sense except that contemporary science borrowed their word for a slightly related concept. Catapults aren't hard to build. (Teaching students with no mechanical skills to build catapults is probably hard. The question is what conclusion to draw from that observation.) Planned obsolescence is an interesting thing to talk about, but it hasn't got much to do with most of science or engineering except in the very specific domain of consumer products in the last century.
I can't tell whether to blame the journalist or the professor, but I'm going to try hard not to let this articule influence my opinion of the study of the history of science.
posted by eotvos at 9:28 AM on May 29, 2019 [2 favorites]
I can't tell whether to blame the journalist or the professor, but I'm going to try hard not to let this articule influence my opinion of the study of the history of science.
posted by eotvos at 9:28 AM on May 29, 2019 [2 favorites]
An idea flashed through my head as I read this: in the ~66 million years since the dinosaurs ended, it seems no other technological civilization has arisen save ours, and he have gone from hunter-gatherer to Internet in ten thousand years.
Maybe a previous civilization (p)recapitulated our stages of technology (down to the planned obsolescence) and ended up building tons of disposable crap, which has all been ground to dust over the last ten million years.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 9:38 AM on May 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
Maybe a previous civilization (p)recapitulated our stages of technology (down to the planned obsolescence) and ended up building tons of disposable crap, which has all been ground to dust over the last ten million years.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 9:38 AM on May 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
I don't know if planned obsolescence is what the consumer wants. Everything I do on my smartphone, for example, I could and would be happy to do on my first smartphone from 2011. If there's a secret to having these things not crap out after 2 years, please do let me know.
posted by noxperpetua at 9:40 AM on May 29, 2019
posted by noxperpetua at 9:40 AM on May 29, 2019
That Lycergus Cup is extremely lovely, but it doesn't justify the headline that "This 1,600-Year-Old Goblet Shows that the Romans Were Nanotechnology Pioneers", Pioneers lead the way where others follow: this was a stand-alone technique that was very clever and shows people in antiquity were absolutely our equals in ingenuity, aesthetic appreciation and technique, but they weren't nanotechnologists.
I'm not saying there are no lost arts and no lost knowledge: clearly, there are plenty of both. As far as I know, nobody's quite sure how early medieval jewellers working in gold and garnet created the micoscopic texture in the settings behind the stones that gives them that unique shimmer. We don't have a good recipe for garum, nor know what species silphium was, two bits of technical knowledge that were commonplace for centuries. Those Pictish pictograms remain an enigma. But none of this points to a lost, systematic body of technical knowledge that in any way corresponds to how we think of as defining the nature of today's technology.
Maybe a previous civilization (p)recapitulated our stages of technology (down to the planned obsolescence) and ended up building tons of disposable crap, which has all been ground to dust over the last ten million years.
Ah, the "would we recognise a 50-million year old fossilised Concorde' question.
Tes, we would. Any civilisation that made use of controlled energy or non-naturally-occurring materials would leave its fingerprints all over the place, even if it had all 'turned to dust' many millions of years ago. We can tell from isotopic analysis of ancient teeth where the original owners grew up and what they ate. We can tell from analysis of the rocks that a natural nuclear reactor was running two billion years ago in Oklo. There are virtually no chances of a previous technological civilisation having had any sort of run on Earth but not showing up in our increasingly finely-tuned and detailed knowledge of how geology, chemistry and physics works over time. There would be anomalies. We LOVE anomalies. They get our attention.
If there's a secret to having these things not crap out after 2 years, please do let me know.
posted by noxperpetua at 17:40 on May 29
There isn't. We're using services, not products, and services need to be actively kept alive in ways that a product you've pushed out of the door does not. That takes varluable resources you'd better off using to compete in today's market.This is actually a really good and novel form of obsolescence in technology that deserves much more attention: it's not the lost knowledge of the ancients that mattes, it the lost knowledge of two years ago.
posted by Devonian at 10:00 AM on May 29, 2019 [6 favorites]
I'm not saying there are no lost arts and no lost knowledge: clearly, there are plenty of both. As far as I know, nobody's quite sure how early medieval jewellers working in gold and garnet created the micoscopic texture in the settings behind the stones that gives them that unique shimmer. We don't have a good recipe for garum, nor know what species silphium was, two bits of technical knowledge that were commonplace for centuries. Those Pictish pictograms remain an enigma. But none of this points to a lost, systematic body of technical knowledge that in any way corresponds to how we think of as defining the nature of today's technology.
Maybe a previous civilization (p)recapitulated our stages of technology (down to the planned obsolescence) and ended up building tons of disposable crap, which has all been ground to dust over the last ten million years.
Ah, the "would we recognise a 50-million year old fossilised Concorde' question.
Tes, we would. Any civilisation that made use of controlled energy or non-naturally-occurring materials would leave its fingerprints all over the place, even if it had all 'turned to dust' many millions of years ago. We can tell from isotopic analysis of ancient teeth where the original owners grew up and what they ate. We can tell from analysis of the rocks that a natural nuclear reactor was running two billion years ago in Oklo. There are virtually no chances of a previous technological civilisation having had any sort of run on Earth but not showing up in our increasingly finely-tuned and detailed knowledge of how geology, chemistry and physics works over time. There would be anomalies. We LOVE anomalies. They get our attention.
If there's a secret to having these things not crap out after 2 years, please do let me know.
posted by noxperpetua at 17:40 on May 29
There isn't. We're using services, not products, and services need to be actively kept alive in ways that a product you've pushed out of the door does not. That takes varluable resources you'd better off using to compete in today's market.This is actually a really good and novel form of obsolescence in technology that deserves much more attention: it's not the lost knowledge of the ancients that mattes, it the lost knowledge of two years ago.
posted by Devonian at 10:00 AM on May 29, 2019 [6 favorites]
The Greeks and the Romans had slaves who were legally were tools. Aristotle wanted robots because he thought slaves were a lot of work and it would be easier to have someone who didn't complain or rub away.
Seems like an important thing to mention...
posted by lesbiassparrow at 10:22 AM on May 29, 2019 [5 favorites]
Seems like an important thing to mention...
posted by lesbiassparrow at 10:22 AM on May 29, 2019 [5 favorites]
And that should say 'run away' not 'rub away'...
posted by lesbiassparrow at 10:29 AM on May 29, 2019
posted by lesbiassparrow at 10:29 AM on May 29, 2019
Would we know if there was a previous industrial civilization on Earth?
posted by the agents of KAOS at 11:23 AM on May 29, 2019 [2 favorites]
posted by the agents of KAOS at 11:23 AM on May 29, 2019 [2 favorites]
Planned obsolescence seems like a distraction at this point in time. It seems to me like we almost certainly need rapid technological innovation, subject to strict and progressively tightening lifetime energy efficiency regulation, in order to try to get some sort of control over overall global power consumption.
I mean, it's all feels a bit deckchairs on the Titanic right now, given the limited political tools available to us, but we've got to try something, and I don't think phasing out planned obsolescence can be done quickly enough to make it a workable immediate solution. It seems like any measure you introduced that could possibly work fast enough to make a difference to our situation would also definitely trigger another Great Recession at the very least.
I dunno, the problem is capitalism itself, of course, but I don't know how we transform our economy fast enough to save our civilisation.
It's worrying, isn't it?
posted by howfar at 12:08 PM on May 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
I mean, it's all feels a bit deckchairs on the Titanic right now, given the limited political tools available to us, but we've got to try something, and I don't think phasing out planned obsolescence can be done quickly enough to make it a workable immediate solution. It seems like any measure you introduced that could possibly work fast enough to make a difference to our situation would also definitely trigger another Great Recession at the very least.
I dunno, the problem is capitalism itself, of course, but I don't know how we transform our economy fast enough to save our civilisation.
It's worrying, isn't it?
posted by howfar at 12:08 PM on May 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
Such as?
Last I knew, Roman concrete was still far more durable than the modern versions.
LED light bulbs that probably won't need replacing for ten years, if not more
I would like to see some real-world data on that. Since I started switching over to LEDs about 5 years ago, I've had several of them fail. They seem to be better than CFL bulbs were, but still, the 10-year life doesn't seem real.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 1:25 PM on May 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
Last I knew, Roman concrete was still far more durable than the modern versions.
LED light bulbs that probably won't need replacing for ten years, if not more
I would like to see some real-world data on that. Since I started switching over to LEDs about 5 years ago, I've had several of them fail. They seem to be better than CFL bulbs were, but still, the 10-year life doesn't seem real.
posted by Kirth Gerson at 1:25 PM on May 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
Okay, totally off-topic, but all those claims on how long light bulbs last bug me!
I only replace light bulbs when they burn out, and I started writing the installation date on them with a sharpie when I started switching to CFLs about 20 years ago. I started switching to LEDs over 5 years ago. I've tried many different brands of both. I can say with certainty that LEDs don't last 10 years in my experience ... they seem to average 2 to 3 years. I don't have any that have lasted 5 years.
CFLs had a similar result. Interestingly, the oldest CFLs I bought did last a long time and a couple of them are still going. Once they got cheap the longevity dropped. Mind you, the old ones are crap compared to later models -- a noticeable delay before turning on, and they take a long time to get to full light.
There are still a couple incandescent bulbs still burning in my house, but those weird low-wattage specialty bulbs in table lamps or whatever. Low wattage incandescent bulbs seem to last forever.
posted by fimbulvetr at 2:03 PM on May 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
I only replace light bulbs when they burn out, and I started writing the installation date on them with a sharpie when I started switching to CFLs about 20 years ago. I started switching to LEDs over 5 years ago. I've tried many different brands of both. I can say with certainty that LEDs don't last 10 years in my experience ... they seem to average 2 to 3 years. I don't have any that have lasted 5 years.
CFLs had a similar result. Interestingly, the oldest CFLs I bought did last a long time and a couple of them are still going. Once they got cheap the longevity dropped. Mind you, the old ones are crap compared to later models -- a noticeable delay before turning on, and they take a long time to get to full light.
There are still a couple incandescent bulbs still burning in my house, but those weird low-wattage specialty bulbs in table lamps or whatever. Low wattage incandescent bulbs seem to last forever.
posted by fimbulvetr at 2:03 PM on May 29, 2019 [1 favorite]
I feel like it's understandably hard to separate a resentment of the author because technologism is something people depend on as a status quo and infuses our beliefs and values and thus biases, versus whatever is inadequate about this one teacher's approach.
I think there's a subtle nuance, the crass comparison is trying to judge historical vs modern artifacts or judging which era was better. But that's a mindset within the terms of technologism. It's rather about being woke to the technological superiority that people do internalize and a process of inquiry that a class like this can serve as a framework for. Cause relatively speaking, none of the "serious" STEM classes are interested in getting students to think about these questions.
I think being honest about that is needed in a conversation which is basically about engineering ethics. It's probably the sort of thing a historical study would be good at deconstructing and challenging received perspectives about technology. A college class like this would fit very well with engineering ethics requirement that more and more engineering colleges in the US are mandating.
posted by polymodus at 2:23 PM on May 29, 2019
I think there's a subtle nuance, the crass comparison is trying to judge historical vs modern artifacts or judging which era was better. But that's a mindset within the terms of technologism. It's rather about being woke to the technological superiority that people do internalize and a process of inquiry that a class like this can serve as a framework for. Cause relatively speaking, none of the "serious" STEM classes are interested in getting students to think about these questions.
I think being honest about that is needed in a conversation which is basically about engineering ethics. It's probably the sort of thing a historical study would be good at deconstructing and challenging received perspectives about technology. A college class like this would fit very well with engineering ethics requirement that more and more engineering colleges in the US are mandating.
posted by polymodus at 2:23 PM on May 29, 2019
Light bulbs are a really interesting testing ground for the economics and ethics of engineered objects with designable lifetimes. I won't give my anecdata here. But...
The Phoebus cartel set a standard lifetime of 1,000 hours on incandescent lightbulbs in the mid 1920s, when they had already reached 2500 hours plus in normal operation. The article at the link is well worth reading. If nothing else, it demonstrates that the business of technology is hugely more complex in every dimension than the FPP article admits.
It is possible to build a very long-lived LED light bulb. THe LED chips themselves, if well-manufactured and operated within ratings, can have a predicted 100k+ hour lifetime. Most failures in practice come from the driver electronics, which runs hot and normally includes electrolytic capacitors that are very thermally sensitive and are easy to make down to a price with limited lifetimes.
Like any electronic circuit, you can design for a target lifetime by knowing about the lifetimes of individual components and doing a price/performance trade-off. These are well-established techniques, as are the ones for accelerated life testing to make sure your (say) 60k lightbulb will probably meet that target without waiting 50k hours to find out. Do you make a 50k lightbulb that costs more than the competition and will sell 5x less than your 10k product? Why?
But. LED technology continues to improve in quality and efficiency. If you had a genuine 10-year lifetime LED lightbulb fitted five years ago, it will make sense to change it now for its modern equivalent; you'll make back the cost of the new bulb within five years because it's much more efficient, and it'll give nicer light too.
posted by Devonian at 4:09 PM on May 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
The Phoebus cartel set a standard lifetime of 1,000 hours on incandescent lightbulbs in the mid 1920s, when they had already reached 2500 hours plus in normal operation. The article at the link is well worth reading. If nothing else, it demonstrates that the business of technology is hugely more complex in every dimension than the FPP article admits.
It is possible to build a very long-lived LED light bulb. THe LED chips themselves, if well-manufactured and operated within ratings, can have a predicted 100k+ hour lifetime. Most failures in practice come from the driver electronics, which runs hot and normally includes electrolytic capacitors that are very thermally sensitive and are easy to make down to a price with limited lifetimes.
Like any electronic circuit, you can design for a target lifetime by knowing about the lifetimes of individual components and doing a price/performance trade-off. These are well-established techniques, as are the ones for accelerated life testing to make sure your (say) 60k lightbulb will probably meet that target without waiting 50k hours to find out. Do you make a 50k lightbulb that costs more than the competition and will sell 5x less than your 10k product? Why?
But. LED technology continues to improve in quality and efficiency. If you had a genuine 10-year lifetime LED lightbulb fitted five years ago, it will make sense to change it now for its modern equivalent; you'll make back the cost of the new bulb within five years because it's much more efficient, and it'll give nicer light too.
posted by Devonian at 4:09 PM on May 29, 2019 [3 favorites]
Oh,I forgot about the “magic nanoparticles in glass” thing. I guess another way the ancients used nanotechnology is the tiny spheres in mayonnaise!
posted by Gilgamesh's Chauffeur at 7:52 PM on May 29, 2019 [4 favorites]
posted by Gilgamesh's Chauffeur at 7:52 PM on May 29, 2019 [4 favorites]
A Classics scholar got you to pay attention to him. That's what this is all about. From his point of view any BS involved is justified.
Sad to see someone in that field act like a politician. Standards have truly dropped.
posted by Metacircular at 12:10 AM on May 30, 2019 [1 favorite]
Sad to see someone in that field act like a politician. Standards have truly dropped.
posted by Metacircular at 12:10 AM on May 30, 2019 [1 favorite]
Is there any research about disposable items of the ancient Mediterranean societies?
Amphorae have been already mentioned (you can't reuse them because the clay will absorb oil or wine and it will go rancid and spoil the whole contents), terracotta oil lamps are the other prototypical ancient household item that they mass-made by the millions.
posted by sukeban at 1:22 AM on May 30, 2019
Amphorae have been already mentioned (you can't reuse them because the clay will absorb oil or wine and it will go rancid and spoil the whole contents), terracotta oil lamps are the other prototypical ancient household item that they mass-made by the millions.
posted by sukeban at 1:22 AM on May 30, 2019
Engineers solve the problems the people in charge want them to solve. If the higher-ups constantly cheap out on materials and don't see the early failures as a problem, nobody will pay engineers to fix it.
We could do so much, but no one wants us to ;_;
posted by scruffy-looking nerfherder at 8:00 AM on May 30, 2019
We could do so much, but no one wants us to ;_;
posted by scruffy-looking nerfherder at 8:00 AM on May 30, 2019
Okay, totally off-topic, but all those claims on how long light bulbs last bug me!
I have some of those color change LED strip lights from Ikea that have been running in my house constantly since I bought it around 10 years ago.
posted by The_Vegetables at 8:04 AM on May 31, 2019
I have some of those color change LED strip lights from Ikea that have been running in my house constantly since I bought it around 10 years ago.
posted by The_Vegetables at 8:04 AM on May 31, 2019
Low wattage, low intensity LEDs last forever. I have >40-year old electronics with functioning LEDs. It is the high wattage LED light bulbs that are meant to replace incandescent bulbs that don't seem to last nearly as long as advertised.
posted by fimbulvetr at 11:12 AM on May 31, 2019
posted by fimbulvetr at 11:12 AM on May 31, 2019
« Older Yes, Madman! | How Many Bones Would You Break to Get Laid? Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
This piece seems like a serious reach.
Can't ancient discovery be valuable, modern economies be wasteful but, in fact, neither really has much to do with the other?
The idea that the impacts of micro-computing are frivolous seems wishful.
posted by Reasonably Everything Happens at 3:56 AM on May 29, 2019 [11 favorites]