tlf9999 said:
...and no containment building for the massive steam explosion that occurred as a result of the positive temperature feedback.
It's easy to lay a big DUH on those guys. The international community told them they needed containment for those reactors...
This is all interesting stuff, but it's looking at the wrong thing. The real problem is not power generation and its environmental side-effects, it's population. In the 17th century, they could be as mucky as they liked because there just weren't very many people, so their impact was limited. The planet is now wildly over-populated and only China has made any effort to do anything about it. The rest of us bleat about eliminating poverty, feeding the hungry, and ensuring energy supplies because it sounds noble, but all it does is ensure further population growth.
We have become a society where values are determined by the marketing interests of multinationals. I see obese people driving electric carts to the car park where they wedge their bodies into over-sized cars and drive one mile home to eat junk food. I see six year old kids riding electric scooters instead of running around getting exercise. I see planned obsolescence cycles as short as three years (computers etc). Is this natural? No. We have allowed big business to pervert our values.
We're rushing towards exstinction. Now, I wouldn't mind that, but I do think it's irresponsible to drag the rest of the planet with us. Sorry about the rant, but the human race really £!$$8$ me off.
We have become a society where values are determined by the marketing interests of multinationals. I see obese people driving electric carts to the car park where they wedge their bodies into over-sized cars and drive one mile home to eat junk food. I see six year old kids riding electric scooters instead of running around getting exercise. I see planned obsolescence cycles as short as three years (computers etc). Is this natural? No. We have allowed big business to pervert our values.
We're rushing towards exstinction. Now, I wouldn't mind that, but I do think it's irresponsible to drag the rest of the planet with us. Sorry about the rant, but the human race really £!$$8$ me off.
EC8010 said:
I guess the question is: do they create a demand? or do they satisfy a demand?
Without answering that, I see no way one can blame the 'businesses" for the demise of our society.
Another way to look at it: adversiting or big businesses aren't new to our societies. They have existed for centuries. And if our society is so open to the enticement from advertising, it should have gone away long time ago.
I suspect advertisers are there to satisfy a demand, for the most part.
No, I don't agree, and here's why.
Let's suppose that you write a piece of software that allows people who aren't computer geeks to type letters but with the difference that they can edit them before printing. Further, you include a spellchecker. You offer your product and it's immediately successful. In fact, it's so successful that everybody buys a copy. Now what do you do? There are no more sales. What you do is you "improve" the software by adding more and more features. If you're especially cunning, you make your new software incompatible with the old.
How about mobile telephones? Once the manufacturers had moved on from items the size of a pair of housebricks with weight to match, the market was fully penetrated. How to sell more of the same to people who already had one? Market them as a fashion accessory and persuade people to replace their telephone every couple of years.
Advertising exists to create a demand. In its early stages it used to be fairly harmless, but it's now far more potent and employs behavioural pyschologists backed up by comprehensive statistics and a plethora of platforms to inflict advertising upon us. The very prevalence of advertising is a testament to its success not only in selling products but in selling itself. We are now conditioned to accept advertising everywhere, from pop-ups on the Internet to billboards in the street and junk mail through your door or ISP.
Let's suppose that you write a piece of software that allows people who aren't computer geeks to type letters but with the difference that they can edit them before printing. Further, you include a spellchecker. You offer your product and it's immediately successful. In fact, it's so successful that everybody buys a copy. Now what do you do? There are no more sales. What you do is you "improve" the software by adding more and more features. If you're especially cunning, you make your new software incompatible with the old.
How about mobile telephones? Once the manufacturers had moved on from items the size of a pair of housebricks with weight to match, the market was fully penetrated. How to sell more of the same to people who already had one? Market them as a fashion accessory and persuade people to replace their telephone every couple of years.
Advertising exists to create a demand. In its early stages it used to be fairly harmless, but it's now far more potent and employs behavioural pyschologists backed up by comprehensive statistics and a plethora of platforms to inflict advertising upon us. The very prevalence of advertising is a testament to its success not only in selling products but in selling itself. We are now conditioned to accept advertising everywhere, from pop-ups on the Internet to billboards in the street and junk mail through your door or ISP.
EC8010 said:
why can you sell the new software with more features if there is no demand for those features?
EC8010 said:
Wouldn't that open up the door for your competitors?
EC8010 said:
there is clearly a level of inter-dependency between satisfying a demand that was there and creating a demand. The key questions is: which of the two is moe dominant?
this is particularly interesting in high-end audio where advertising costs account for as much 70% of product costs. and high-end audio firms do advertising heavily in print media. and the whole industry still struggles today.
My point is that unless one does a thorough research, it is tough to conclude which causes which.
As one who still uses DOS programs for drawing and analysis, I'm fairly resistant to software "upgrades", but corporate sales are a different matter. Years ago, I recall being told that we would be changing operating systems and that we would also have to use MS Word instead of Word Perfect because support had been withdrawn for the previous products. (I never did find out what that "support" actually entailed.) I would also point out that 99% of word processor users use only the most basic facilities. In effect, they've paid for features they will never use.
We're in danger of descending into line by line rebuttals, so I'll offer a final example of marketing vs consumer demand. Children's toys. We're coming up to that time of year when expensive toys will be heavily promoted during children's television and exasperated parents will succumb to pester power and buy those presents. Would the children have demanded those specific presents if they hadn't been heavily advertised?
We're in danger of descending into line by line rebuttals, so I'll offer a final example of marketing vs consumer demand. Children's toys. We're coming up to that time of year when expensive toys will be heavily promoted during children's television and exasperated parents will succumb to pester power and buy those presents. Would the children have demanded those specific presents if they hadn't been heavily advertised?
EC8010 said:
that goes to the point of creating vs. satisfying demand: the general demand for toys during holiday seasons is clearly there. the kids may not know of specific toys but they want toys.
Advertising is there to make sure a toy stands out among a group of competing toys. In other words, advertising is driven by competition among toy manufacturers.
Will advertising cause an upward swing in general demand for toys? Probably. Is that significant? my experience is that it is not.
EC8010 [/i]I see planned obsolescence cycles as short as three years (computers etc)[/QUOTE] I'm getting 7-10 years out of my Macs. [QUOTE][i]Originally posted by EC8010 said:
My current cel-phone is 6 years old (and i fear the day it breaks since the new ones aren't as nice)
But i agree that curbing population growth would go a long way to helping out the planet -- at least until we can get out of the gravity well.
dave
Re: population growth, you guys should read Julian Simon. I had similar views as yours, but he turned me around, especially when he put his money where his mouth is (the infamous bet with Paul Ehrlich).
A quick overview of his life: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/5.02/ffsimon_pr.html
The wikipedia entry is far less flattering.
In defense of EC's point regarding software, as far as I'm concerned, I have NEVER had a more usable and useful graphing program as Cricket Graph, nor as useful and usable drawing program as Cricket Draw. These are now only available from antique dealers and are incompatible with any contemporary OS.
A quick overview of his life: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/5.02/ffsimon_pr.html
The wikipedia entry is far less flattering.
In defense of EC's point regarding software, as far as I'm concerned, I have NEVER had a more usable and useful graphing program as Cricket Graph, nor as useful and usable drawing program as Cricket Draw. These are now only available from antique dealers and are incompatible with any contemporary OS.
So... why DO those big corporations spend so much on advertising then? Why did people HAVE to have the Air Jorden?Its a shoe for God's sake! You seem to often argue that humans are/should be rational creatures, when all evidence says otherwise.
So you feel you are not influenced by this advertising? IMHO This implies to me that you are unable to see how you are being influenced. I'm not saying its bad, but to deny it seems a bit unobservant.
I sorry though, that you seem to think that that the US shouldn't exist.
SY said:
Same with Trapeze -- best spreadsheet ever written. Weighing in at 17 years now since the latest revision, and running on 14 year old hardware, still runs circles around the latest version of Excel on even a Dual 2.7 G5
dave
SY. I have original disks for Cricket Draw & Chart, and machines to run it are still kicking around.
That's because you're an antique dealer! 😉
I'll get up there as soon as I can and swap you something cool. I really, really miss those programs.
I'll get up there as soon as I can and swap you something cool. I really, really miss those programs.
SY said:
Hmmm. I had a quick read from the link you gave. One of the reasons that the air in industrialised nations is cleaner and that there is less pollution is that we have exported our nasty processes abroad. Have you noticed how many semiconductors are made in Mexico? And how much traditional (read "mucky") manufacturing is done in China and India (anyone remember Union Carbide at Bhopal)? My understanding is that Germany achieves much of its "cleanliness" by exporting its muck. Of course, that policy suffered a bit of blow when they imported East Germany, but there you are.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.