Not future-proofing
kk.org
Not future-proofing
1–10 of 35 posts
Re: Not future-proofing
#2The exception is with software. You can future proof by making something into a general purpose computer that can be updated.
Also, by modularity, and by choosing up and coming stuff that is clearly going to be big(Like the next generation of an existing technology).
Buying something before you need it can definitely be a High Crime against your own happiness.
But future proofing can sometimes be a tool to avoid owning more "Stuff" without giving up functionality.
I just bought a MOLLE backpack. I expect the webbing standard to be around, and that possibility in the future I might want to briefly carry more stuff than normal, but I don't need to buy anything but the pouches I want right now.
I also bought a solar generator. I was sure to choose one with LiFePo4 and USB-PD inputs(Unfortunately, it still comes with a dedicated DC power adapter that I do not want, but is otherwise wonderful).
Of all the tech items I own, my phone and laptop probably inspire the most confidence. I also like my Fire Stick. I rarely regret buying something that's just a general purpose computer in disguise.
They have the adaptability built in, without the need to add hardware.
I also rarely regret choosing modularity.
Not so much in software, I don't do UNIXy stuff, because even a dozen large apps is still a trivial amount of storage on a modern disk.
But with hardware, the more standard all the connections are, the less I have to own. If I use something once a month, I don't want to drag out a special charger. I don't want adapter dongles in my ports. I don't want uncommon consumables that only come from one company.
My idea of future proofing is to mostly avoid dedicated hardware.
Re: Not future-proofing
#3Even though I generally like the sentiment, replacing the cat-5 cable with a newer one should be a pretty fast task, and wired ethernet always is better than wireless.
Re: Not future-proofing
#4This is a BBC documentary of Stewart Brand presenting the ideas in "how buildings learn" which makes the same point through examples of what architecture works and what doesn't, over time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maTkAcDbrEY
Re: Not future-proofing
#5The exception is with software. You can future proof by making something into a general purpose computer that can be updated. Also, by modularity, and by choosing up and coming stuff that is clearly going to be big(Like the next generation of an existing technology). Buying something before you need it can definitely be a High Crime against your own happiness. But future proofing can sometimes be a tool to avoid owni…
My experience has been that software is where this is the strongest. The term YAGNI (you ain't gonna need it) is very much a precursor to this mindset, but I have found that you can go further by just trying to write software that's easy to change and update. However you should not do that by preemptive interface-design, etc, you should just focus on what actually makes it easier to swap things out.
Re: Not future-proofing
#6We can change the definition of "future-proof" -- your cable was future proofed in that if you were using it for hundreds of years, it wouldn't require any maintenance and if the age of wireless tech never came, your cables would be relevant
Extreme example: not future-proofing cables would be like laying them out above ground where the weather/ elements will destroy them before a year's end
But agreed that buying for your immediate need, with a little bit of futuresight is helpful
Re: Not future-proofing
#7I like KK's work, but the first part of this article is weird. It's more of an argument for why you should leave pull strings in your empty conduit.
That said, I agree with the idea of generally buying only what you need and buying it at the time you need it.
Re: Not future-proofing
#8Even though I generally like the sentiment, replacing the cat-5 cable with a newer one should be a pretty fast task, and wired ethernet always is better than wireless.
Agreed. Maybe there will be entangled particles in the future that get shot out down wires and then allow you to instantaneously communicate with people after you receive them.
The right future oriented mindset in terms of building a house would be to make it easy to install wires. Or pipes. Or whatever.
Just in time hardware is only useful if you have a place to put it. That’s the tricky part; trying to figure out how to make sure you stay compatible with whatever new stuff comes along.
Re: Not future-proofing
#9Even though I generally like the sentiment, replacing the cat-5 cable with a newer one should be a pretty fast task, and wired ethernet always is better than wireless.
Agreed. Maybe there will be entangled particles in the future that get shot out down wires and then allow you to instantaneously communicate with people after you receive them. The right future oriented mindset in terms of building a house would be to make it easy to install wires. Or pipes. Or whatever. Just in time hardware is only useful if you have a place to put it. That’s the tricky part; trying to figure out h…
Uh. You can't shoot a particle down a wire. The electron that comes out the far end is not the same one that went in.
Re: Not future-proofing
#10But you did use use your copper telephone line during the emergence of digital bits and bytes. Someone planned ahead for you. Do the same.
Another take on future proof is around designing to avoid unwanted obsolescence; we have finite resources on this big rock, use what you can. Get creative. Not planning for the future will see you under water.