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

Not future-proofing

kk.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 35 posts

Re: Not future-proofing

#21

Post by kkfx »

It's possible to "future-proof" A BIT, in the term of simplicity of design, small scale of the final product, cheapness of it.

Or, please make simple houses, give them large space for any new gear and make them last a human life, at the heritage the old house should be unmounted, recycled and rebuilt with current tech being upgradable enough for another human life. Made simple software that can be easily changed like classic Smalltalk/Lisp systems. Made things easy to recycle etc

Similar things happen in various domains: in the past we rush to made megaprojects, now we prefer smaller ones. That's the future-proofness: it's always a miss and hit scenario, but in most cases a small miss is not costly, a hit is just nice. Short terms can be predicted a bit, long terms demand simply the ability to evolve.

Re: Not future-proofing

#22

Post by pseudosavant »

I had to install a 35’ HDMI cable through my walls and attic 11 years ago. I bought the highest quality, largest wire gauge, cable Monoprice had. I just upgraded my receiver and TV to 4K HDR. Guess what, that HDMI cable that was bought before 4K HDR even existed, works perfectly. I don’t even have to use chroma subsampling to bring the required bandwidth down. Oddly enough, the one thing it can’t do, that the new replacement cable, that I haven’t installed yet, can do is 1440p. 1080p and 2160p are fine. Even though 1440p even at 120Hz is less bandwidth than 4K @ 60Hz. Go figure.

I don’t use my CAT6 as much as I used to, but where I do, it is amazing. Wired connections are essential for remote work IMO.

Re: Not future-proofing

#23

Post by bhewes »

At least in the houses I grew up in. It is very easy to rewire everything. We went from cat5-cat7 (my dad still has the same house). Though we use it more as a wireless trunk.

Re: Not future-proofing

#24

Post by quesera »

KK> I am trying to think of examples of successful future proofing. Where someone figured out what was coming and built something ready for it. Do you know any examples?

Commercial construction.

Don't try to predict the future. Reduce the structural essentials to their minimum requirements (columns, beams, trusses, pans), and make it easy to adapt the finish layer to changing preferences or use cases.

Drop ceilings, non-load bearing walls, conduits for power and signal, locate services (plumbing, HVAC, power, etc) in a centrally-located stack to minimize the horizontal runs to arbitrary locations.

I wish these ideas were more common in residential construction. Most are easy to apply, although there would be a slight bump in cost (10%?).

Re: Not future-proofing

#25

Post by justsomehnguy »

skybrian wrote: post #19

I found this part puzzling: "And the one place in my office I still use wires — my desktop — the existing cat5 ethernet cable was not fast enough for the new speeds of fiber optic." What would fiber speeds be useful for in a home office? It seems like for most people, Ethernet would still be fine?

Between "buy the perfect cable you would bury in the wall" and "buy [almost any] fiber" and thr weird things you sometimes need to do to route the cables in the house (I swear, people who design them aren't from this planet) sometimes it would be easier to just lay the fiber (and eat cost with media converters and such) than to gamble on Cat6, IF you really need more than 1Gbit reliably.

Re: Not future-proofing

#26

Post by bitwize »

didericis wrote: post #8
legulere wrote: post #3

Even 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…

No, there won't be entangled particles that allow instantaneous communication. Per the No Communication Theorem, information cannot propagate faster than light speed, end of story.

Re: Not future-proofing

#27

Post by didericis »

bitwize wrote: post #26
didericis wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

No, there won't be entangled particles that allow instantaneous communication. Per the No Communication Theorem, information cannot propagate faster than light speed, end of story.

As you can probably tell, I don’t know much about particle physics and am not looking to get into a debate about that specific hypothetical, was just saying wires (or small tubes) might be useful for future stuff and it’d be nice if they were easy to put on/take off of buildings.

Re: Not future-proofing

#28

Post by jacknews »

eternityforest wrote: post #2

The 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…

Yes modularity and standardization is the key to longevity, because it gives you flexibility, upgradability, repairability, etc.

I can still use all my home's wiring and light switch boxes, even though I now have LED lights, and various dimmer, electronic and remote light switches. Because it is all standard and modular.

In contrast I have to junk my entire blender, including the perfectly functioning base/motor unit, because a small plastic catch which secures the bowl to the base snapped off. Since the whole thing is proprietary, not a standard connection, replacements are not available economically. If it were standard, I can imaging all kinds of specialist bowls being available, with new designs being created to cater for the latest cooking fashions.

Re: Not future-proofing

#29

Post by eternityforest »

jacknews wrote: post #28
eternityforest wrote: post #2

The 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…

Yes modularity and standardization is the key to longevity, because it gives you flexibility, upgradability, repairability, etc. I can still use all my home's wiring and light switch boxes, even though I now have LED lights, and various dimmer, electronic and remote light switches. Because it is all standard and modular. In contrast I have to junk my entire blender, including the perfectly functioning base/motor unit…

Standards are one of the things that really defines modern tech.

It's usually fine when they change, because adapters will be made, as long as the new thing becomes the most common standard, so they don't even block innovation, in fact they probably create more innovation that nonstandard designs, because you can do things that requires huge volumes to do cheaply.

If blenders were standard, knife sharpeners would probably use the same base too. If it had a power connections vacuum blender bowls would use it. If it had digital control, you'd have baseplates to use magic bullet cups on a normal blender with the same push to activate system.

The world could have a lot less junk in it. I wish the government or some foundation would start a department of standards development, and teach consumers why they should choose approved gear that uses all the relevant specs.

Re: Not future-proofing

#30

Post by quickthrower2 »

ghostly_s wrote: post #9
didericis wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You eventually get the electron that went in after a few hours. Well if it is direct current.
Post reply on HN