Live data from Hacker News

The End of Industrial Society

palladiummag.com

31–40 of 203 posts

Re: The End of Industrial Society

#31

> These social technology cores decay with time as they obsolete their own foundations, and as errors and parasitism build up A lot to explain there. > Yet even in the case of Britain, the key social technologies failed after the Second World War, as the latitude afforded to aristocratic scientists and industrialists was replaced by a system of bureaucratic processes. And there. I found this unreadable, sorry. Lots o…

And also nutty statements like this: > Americans and Europeans may at that point be de-facto barred from visiting China by their own governments ...which seems to indicate a lack of familiarity with the relationship between American+European governments and their citizens.

As an EU citizen I was de facto forbidden to enter other EU countries until relatively recently (because of the pandemic), not sure why do you find that conclusion far-fetched.

Also, because I may want to actually visit the US sometime in the future I've been making a conscious decision not to visit Iran, for example (even though I find Iran to be a beautiful country, at least from the photos I can find on the web). I know there's no explicit "if you have visited Iran you cannot visit the USA anymore" policy coming from the US visa officials, but I feel like that's the direction things are going right now so why risk it?

Re: The End of Industrial Society

#32
I like to say "countries that don't produce tangible goods are at the mercy of those who do". Push come to shove, the service economy is worthless. What matters is production of real goods that you can hold in your hand. At least agriculture is still a top priority despite calls from weirdly misled groups to end subsidies.

Personally, seeing how easy it is to laser cut metal or get a CTO part or a PCB in China makes me jealous. There are similar services in the EU, but not as good, more expensive, and not as widespread (i.e. you can find them in Germany and the UK, but not in many other countries... at least postal services work well, I guess).

Re: The End of Industrial Society

#33
post #11

Hum, grumble mumble... We surely are at the end of a cycle in human development terms, witch means the actual society going to change in something new, BUT "Industrial Society" is not actually a society in humans terms. We have had countless "industrial society" in various different societies, from Japanese steel, China ceramic and shipping (far in the past), metallurgic industry from Celts, Roman industry, cord and…

So far yours is the only substantive response to the post (edit: although a few others popped up after I wrote this). I agree with most of the broad ideas you bring up which are insightful. However, the tone of your comment does not seem to be quite acknowledging that we are in reality now in a somewhat dire situation. Anyway I have a few questions.

I too see many issues with "managerial/profit driven development" and true innovation. However, do you suppose that we should remove the profit motive? What do we replace it with? Because unfortunately people seem to fall back to some sort of centralized system like a scientific committee or centralized AI. The problems with these paradigms are even more severe than with corporations.

My take is that involving profits is a way to introduce rules and score keeping to the game. And again, although there are quite a few cheaters, and least there is a game you can play. If you take away the rules and points, you are left with just politics. Or, in the case of a centralized AI, highly concentrated politics related to who controls the AI. And the rest organizing themselves how? Because another part of this equation is that humans are animals and will inevitably construct hierarchies related to mating and resource distribution (just like other animals).

Large scale ultra-local production empowered by things like 3d printing seems to be on its way. But its very far from taking over. And right now, for example, we have a crisis in food production. And the few community gardens we have are negligible in terms of total calories. Also, almost all items, from construction materials to household goods, require oil to produce. Its nice to fantasize about algal oil or something, but large scale deployment is nowhere near here.

To me what could possibly work or at least be a step in the right direction is to use something like advanced cryptocurrency and smart contract technology to reimplement things like money and government in ways that are more fair, cohesive and sane. Combine or even integrate that with truly distributed real time and redundant information systems for large scale data aggregation, visualization and query. My idea is kind of going along the lines of the centralized 1950s style AI, at least as far as being able to get holistic views. But it incorporates modern ideas about the robustness of distributed networks. So we can effectively and transparently share and aggregate global information using peer-to-peer protocols, but not be restricted to a single authoritarian interpretation.

But I am very curious to hear, did you have specific ideas about moving beyond the "managerial/profit driven development"? It just feels like people who want to completely drop money or profit from this usually don't have a great plan. I think most are envisioning a vast network of "intentional communities" where everyone just shares. Again, the reality of that is not going to be as great as you think. Because it means replacing the "game" of profit with just pure politics. Most of the intentional communities become kind of like little cults. Organization will happen one way or another. If there isn't some points accumulation or other structure then you default to manipulation, stabbings, etc.

Re: The End of Industrial Society

#34

> These social technology cores decay with time as they obsolete their own foundations, and as errors and parasitism build up A lot to explain there. > Yet even in the case of Britain, the key social technologies failed after the Second World War, as the latitude afforded to aristocratic scientists and industrialists was replaced by a system of bureaucratic processes. And there. I found this unreadable, sorry. Lots o…

Agreed. I found an interesting thesis that made me think "OK, parts of this sound plausible to me, help me connect the dots." But then there were no dots to be found, let alone connections. I am a very literal person, and in my youth I used to think this was a bit of a handicap, as "big thinkers" needed to be able to think of things in more abstract ways. As I've gotten older, though, I think I've become more aware o…

[deleted]

Re: The End of Industrial Society

#35

>The countryside has become an industrial resource base, rather than the setting for a pre-industrial way of life. I would like to argue that this is the other way round: A corn field is a highly parallelized and automatized food creation machine. Is there a significant difference between operating crops and life stock or an industrial machine? I don't think so. Industrialization means that we have transferred the au…

> Is Facebook the 'Wright Flyer of social networks' or is Facebook already the Saturn rocket?

No. This is Facebook [1], that flappy steam powered umbrella machine that shakes itself to pieces and kills the pilot.

Honestly, I think if there were any reason to think "Industrial society is eating itself", social media (and tech addiction) would be the number one suspects.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fw_C_sbfyx8

Re: The End of Industrial Society

#36

> These social technology cores decay with time as they obsolete their own foundations, and as errors and parasitism build up A lot to explain there. > Yet even in the case of Britain, the key social technologies failed after the Second World War, as the latitude afforded to aristocratic scientists and industrialists was replaced by a system of bureaucratic processes. And there. I found this unreadable, sorry. Lots o…

Agreed. I found an interesting thesis that made me think "OK, parts of this sound plausible to me, help me connect the dots." But then there were no dots to be found, let alone connections. I am a very literal person, and in my youth I used to think this was a bit of a handicap, as "big thinkers" needed to be able to think of things in more abstract ways. As I've gotten older, though, I think I've become more aware o…

A “big idea” that sounds abstract to a literal thinker, should be seen as a hunch or an intuition about a situation. It can never be explained in satisfiable depth to a literal thinker. Only in hindsight will it be obvious.

You expect proof, or a literal pathway of thought and explanation, because it has served you well. This is the guaranteed route to proving an idea, if such a literal route exists. Such ideas are grounded in axioms that exist or can be built on smaller already established truths.

It is far more difficult to explain literally a strong hunch, that an excellent intuitive thinker has but which is lacking the necessary foundation axioms. Maybe this hunch or novel idea cannot be structured upon existing truths, because it looks beyond its current viewpoint. Or maybe the idea is about a situation that is happening outside the established system.

This doesn’t make this idea less valuable to pursue further. It might just be several magnitudes harder to wrap ones head around.

Re: The End of Industrial Society

#37
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. I found an interesting thesis that made me think "OK, parts of this sound plausible to me, help me connect the dots." But then there were no dots to be found, let alone connections. I am a very literal person, and in my youth I used to think this was a bit of a handicap, as "big thinkers" needed to be able to think of things in more abstract ways. As I've gotten older, though, I think I've become more aware o…

A “big idea” that sounds abstract to a literal thinker, should be seen as a hunch or an intuition about a situation. It can never be explained in satisfiable depth to a literal thinker. Only in hindsight will it be obvious. You expect proof, or a literal pathway of thought and explanation, because it has served you well. This is the guaranteed route to proving an idea, if such a literal route exists. Such ideas are g…

"This doesn’t make this [big abstract] idea less valuable to pursue further."

But such ideas often need to be heavily driven by the one with the idea. Even people receptive to the idea often misunderstand such a vision.

So for practical purposes the idea is BS unless the person with the idea is actively working on it. It doesn't need to be proven yet, but if the person with the idea isn't working on it, probably nobody else will.

Sure, sometimes big ideas inspire others, but often the ispiration is more of a winding path rather than a direct "I read this big idea and did it".

Re: The End of Industrial Society

#38
post #15

> If this is correct, then post-industrial society isn’t our name for the next stage of civilizational progress. Instead, the term is true in its most literal and pessimistic interpretation: a society after and without industrial civilization. Such a society doesn’t even have the social infrastructure of agricultural civilizations. This means it cannot even mint the preliminary social capital needed to reindustrializ…

The cause isn't adequately explained, but it's hard not to see the ramifications of the outcome everywhere you look. We live in a society that couldn't rebuild, if it had to, the New York City subway, or the Interstate Highway System, or the national electric grid, or numerous other features of industrialized 20th century America.

Re: The End of Industrial Society

#39
"Massive white-collar overproduction means the victory of sharp elbows over sharp minds."

Some of the oil states have hit this in a big way. Egypt, for one. Egypt at one time guaranteed employment for all university graduates. That resulted in the government employing a quarter of the workforce. The US is around 14% government, and it's mostly local government - teachers and cops. In the US, this becomes about half the people with college degrees doing jobs that don't need a college degree. A college degree in the US no only no longer guarantees a middle class lifestyle, it may have negative economic value due to debt.

The solution of overproducing white-collar jobs is at first natural and then dysfunctional.

We see this in college administration, where the administrator to professor ratio has doubled in 25 years.[1] If you look at pictures of factories from the early 20th century, there's a common pattern - a small administration building in front of a large factory. We no longer see that.

I'd expected the US to hit "peak office" about two decades ago. We may see that now, but it's because of working from home, not a reduced need for white collar work.

[1] https://www.huffpost.com/entry/higher-ed-administrators-grow...

Re: The End of Industrial Society

#40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, a slightly challenging read, but it's not a dissertation, rather more an opinion piece. There are some interesting ideas and constructs, not commonly presented, here. Maybe rather than criticising it for not spoon feeding you with extracts/soundbites from sources that may appear to be of "academic substance" (but ultimately most likely assumptions themselves), consider it a source of ideas to explore and form yo…

The entire article hinges on the principle that everything collapses because there is "on-paper upward mobility of functional industrial workers to dysfunctional knowledge economy workers." Translation: the knowledge economy isn't as robust as the industrial economy because, reasons. He never gets into those reasons because he doesn't seem to understand industrial production, and many get it wrong. The industrial wor…

> Translation: the knowledge economy isn't as robust as the industrial economy because, reasons.

While I didn't agree with everything in the article myself, I would say the translation is actually more along the lines of:

"As a civilization becomes more efficient, fewer of the members of the population need to know how to actually do anything. The civilization becomes less robust in the face of new pressures because all everyone knows how to do is sit around in their underwear and play Call of Duty when they aren't LARPing being a knowledge worker."

If you can survive without chopping wood, soon enough you'll forget how to chop wood. If a civilization can survive long enough without anyone knowing how to build/repair the technology that sits a level below the current water mark, it will. See: Cobol codebases.

Post reply on HN