Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The world in 1975 (2007)

ranprieur.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 57 posts

Re: The world in 1975 (2007)

#31

Post by ArkyBeagle »

Isamu wrote: post #2

>Radio stations played a great variety of really good new music. Please. The lack of variety in the public sphere is exactly what led to the "underground" music scenes. In the 70's the new unheard music was punk and the like. When I left for college in '79 it was an absolutely jaw-dropping, exciting experience to find an entire music store filled with this "alternative" music that no one played (outside of college st…

So compare it to present-day Top 40 radio. There is no contest.

There really was a great variety of good music. Check the Top 100 lists through the decade. There was a lot of utter dreck as well. Even that might have been at least somewhat interesting.

Punk wasn't exactly evenly distributed. The only reason I knew about it then at all was from people writing about it, which made it appear to be an artifact of journalism.

Re: The world in 1975 (2007)

#32

Post by harel »

I still don't get the whole 9 to 6 thing. 9 to 5 seems more reasonable (considering past norms. I don't believe were productive 8 hours a day sttaight). I think, at the very least the song lyrics should change, or better yet, we go back to past norms.

Re: The world in 1975 (2007)

#33

Post by hueving »

whitie wrote: post #29
Isamu wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not trying to be controversial or anything ... just that the reporting on the ice age thinking had traction in popular press. Nor am I saying that this represented a consensus view that later changed to another consensus view. I think, however, that it took time before the ice age faction gave way. Meanwhile, in reading popular science reporting of the time, I think it is not too subjective to claim that the ice age…

I just linked the paper to show that what you did say was incorrect. This is really not the forum for half sayings and saying what-nots.

Wtf are you talking about? The guy is talking about what he experienced in the 70s. Are you seriously going to claim his memory is fucked and they were actually saying 'hot age' when they were saying 'ice age'? Regardless of what the scientific consensus was of the time, a pending ice age was reported in the mainstream media.

Re: The world in 1975 (2007)

#34

Post by stevefolta »

ArkyBeagle wrote: post #31
Isamu wrote: post #2

>Radio stations played a great variety of really good new music. Please. The lack of variety in the public sphere is exactly what led to the "underground" music scenes. In the 70's the new unheard music was punk and the like. When I left for college in '79 it was an absolutely jaw-dropping, exciting experience to find an entire music store filled with this "alternative" music that no one played (outside of college st…

So compare it to present-day Top 40 radio. There is no contest. There really was a great variety of good music. Check the Top 100 lists through the decade. There was a lot of utter dreck as well. Even that might have been at least somewhat interesting. Punk wasn't exactly evenly distributed. The only reason I knew about it then at all was from people writing about it, which made it appear to be an artifact of journal…

Also, in 1975, punk was just getting started, and it wasn't yet clear that radio was not gonna play the Ramones.

I remember hearing "Bohemian Rhapsody" on the radio for the first time, and thinking they'd never play it again, 'cause it was just too weird.

Re: The world in 1975 (2007)

#35

Post by hueving »

proc0 wrote: post #26

Also, there population of earth was 50% less (3.8 bill according to my quick search). Everywhere you go there would be 50% less people. Imagine that.

Not really. Some places would be completely undeveloped while others would have been about the same size or even larger (think of industrial mid west cities).

Re: The world in 1975 (2007)

#36

Post by smikhanov »

mcculley wrote: post #18

> To fly on an airplane, you just had to walk through a metal detector, and if someone was there to meet you or say goodbye, they could go all the way to the gate without a ticket. Also, you could meet somebody for lunch at the terminal during a layover or have a meeting right in the terminal at a restaurant. I had a boss before 9/11 that had direct reports all over the country. He would sometimes fly out and have lu…

    None of this is practical now with the security hassles
In North America with TSA, absolutely. When I need to do a stopover in one of the efficient airports in Central or Northern Europe, I often go out to arrivals area (even if it involves going through passport control) and then back through departures. This way I can spend time doing some shopping for brands I don't have at home. CPH and ZRH are very good for that, CGN less so, ARN is not worth the hassle. Security in the departure area is always incomparably better than the same in America and with a layover of 1.5-2 hours you can do it at almost a leisurely pace.

Re: The world in 1975 (2007)

#37

Post by intopieces »

kuschku wrote: post #24
TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #11

>There were no digital watches. And wind-up watches were cheap. LED digital watches arrived at my school in 1974/75. LCD watches arrived about a year later. >Headphones were giant things you used in the basement to listen to Pink Floyd. I had a pair of 424s in 1975. They sounded pretty good. http://www.tonepublications.com/old-school/sennheiser-hd-414... >There was no portable way to listen to music except transistor…

Regarding of the speed of cashiers: ALDI is the only store where actual tests showed that the speed has gone down since the introduction of scanners — but all prices of all products had to be known by all cashiers, and there was always only one product of each type.

I have a feeling that inventory control, price accuracy and the ease of training cashiers are considered reasonable trade-offs for how long it takes to ring customers.

Re: The world in 1975 (2007)

#38

Post by kuschku »

intopieces wrote: post #37
kuschku wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding of the speed of cashiers: ALDI is the only store where actual tests showed that the speed has gone down since the introduction of scanners — but all prices of all products had to be known by all cashiers, and there was always only one product of each type.

I have a feeling that inventory control, price accuracy and the ease of training cashiers are considered reasonable trade-offs for how long it takes to ring customers.

Well, the cashiers memorized the EAN, the barcode.

Even today they often type the barcode faster in than it can be recognized.

For inventory control and price accuracy you get the same advantages as with barcode, but you can be faster and work without a barcode reader.

Re: The world in 1975 (2007)

#39

Post by aidenn0 »

macintux wrote: post #28
mcculley wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> You payed by cash or check > You can still do this using a debit card. His point wasn't debit versus credit. It was that one had to have the actual paper cash or a checkbook handy when stopping at the store. It's a lot more convenient now.

I still remember my mother using a credit card (probably ~1980) and the cashier pulled out a phone-book-sized list of known stolen CC numbers. I told my mom "I hope she finds it in the book" (not knowing its purpose) and she replied "I hope she doesn't". Anyway, even credit cards were slower then.

Yeah, I remember the express lines in the 80s often were "cash only" since check and credit were so much slower than cash.

Re: The world in 1975 (2007)

#40

Post by whitie »

hueving wrote: post #33
whitie wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just linked the paper to show that what you did say was incorrect. This is really not the forum for half sayings and saying what-nots.

Wtf are you talking about? The guy is talking about what he experienced in the 70s. Are you seriously going to claim his memory is fucked and they were actually saying 'hot age' when they were saying 'ice age'? Regardless of what the scientific consensus was of the time, a pending ice age was reported in the mainstream media.

Don't have a tantrum.

"Later on more work was done to get better global temperature proxies and it was decided that the trend was upwards."

Anecdotal memories of an article or two on Ice ages in the Seventies do nothing to support that claim - It was wrong.

nuff said

Post reply on HN