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

The Glass Famine

edconway.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 66 posts

Re: The Glass Famine

#41

Post by VLM »

Its interesting to read post WWII accounts of the early amateur telescope making hobby. There was a fear there would be a second glass famine in WWII so a somewhat massive cottage industry sprung up to make optics which indirectly led to easily available supplies and ability to make homemade amateur telescopes. Which led directly to "The Amateur Scientist" column in the old Scientific American Magazine. And that column led indirectly to magazine columns like "Computer Recreations".

I had only read the WWII and post WWII coverage so it was interesting to read the linked article about the original WWI glass famine.

In a strange way, overtaxing window glass in the UK in the 1800s indirectly resulted in me implementing a Mandelbrot calculator on an 80s home computer based upon some interesting columns.

Re: The Glass Famine

#42

Post by GolfPopper »

polotics wrote: post #36

This gives me sickening vibes of the "War is a racket" take. Both side's agreeing to enable each other's massacre of their own country's downtrodden young masses, while all sorts of profiteering going on at the back no doubt.

When you have time, you might wish to track down the history of Krupp[1]. A German company, they sold arms to all sides in WWI, having gained the the freedom to do so by previously threatening the Kaiser with moving their operations to Russia.

My recollection is that Krupp was paid a premium based on the effectiveness of their artillery shells - which, again, were being sold to both sides. Said effectiveness was calculated based on casualty numbers... so the more soldiers died (on both sides) the more Krupp was paid.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krupp

Re: The Glass Famine

#43

Post by stonogo »

roryirvine wrote: post #30
RugnirViking wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> most people are still more comfortable with yards than meters I feel this is highly context dependant, too. Hanging out with a rural group of people born in the 80s? yards. Anyone in a city and/or born after 1990 is probably more comfortable with meters

I'm a year older than Conway and have never heard people using yards to mean anything other than a concreted or paved area, even in rural settings. Maybe posh horsey types are different, but even they're mostly concerned with furlongs and hands and suchlike. (Not wanting to disparage Conway or his work - it's likely that, as gp suggests, his choice of measurements is simply due to the historic source material)

I was in England last month and the road signs still have yards on them. Their government has a whole website complaining about it: https://metrication.uk/transport/roads/distance-signs/

Re: The Glass Famine

#44

Post by abirch »

BigTTYGothGF wrote: post #38
abirch wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not saying that the economy or markets are everything; however, if you don't have dissidents you don't as much friction. If China wants to move your mother's grave for a factory, there's not a lot you can do. Whereas in democracies you can try to draw it out with legal action, etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London

Yes, eminent domain is there. In the case you linked to, it started in 1998 and took until 2005 for the Supreme Court. Sure new cases may happen faster, but it still takes year with due process and the courts.

Re: The Glass Famine

#46

Post by GolfPopper »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #12
ifwinterco wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was going to say this. The right form of state intervention can be hugely beneficial

The U.S. will have to come around to that. I'm not sure how low it has to sink relative to China , but there will come a time when it will be seen as the obvious strategy. Perhaps Great Depression II will be the spark as Great Depression I was the spark for the limited socialism in the U.S.

My own best guess is that the U.S. will never come around, but its successor states probably will.

Re: The Glass Famine

#47

Post by soperj »

raphinou wrote: post #10

I find it interesting that the book is available about everywhere save for North America according to the author, but the first distances in the text are given in yards, mainly used only in North America. Ok, this is not the exact book text, but still, it looks as a misfit to the audience of the book.

Never met a Canadian who used yards, unless they're talking about the grass in front or back of their house.

Re: The Glass Famine

#48

Post by MDCore »

mrguyorama wrote: post #32
williamdclt wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

still isn't for most purposes, and most people are still more comfortable with yards than meters for day-to-day stuff (friends are often looking at me blankly when I give a distance in meters)

IMO metric is missing a critical measurement that is roughly the size of "a foot". Most measurements in one measuring system have very similar equivalents in other measuring systems or useful approximations, like a pound being 1/2 a kilo, a liter being about a quart, or a meter being about a yard. Even various ancient chinese measurements can be similar like this. Except the metric system seems to have eschewn the co…

I went to school with a 30cm ruler in the 80s. As a result I have an instinctual sense for that length.

Re: The Glass Famine

#49

Post by Giefo6ah »

mrguyorama wrote: post #32
williamdclt wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

still isn't for most purposes, and most people are still more comfortable with yards than meters for day-to-day stuff (friends are often looking at me blankly when I give a distance in meters)

IMO metric is missing a critical measurement that is roughly the size of "a foot". Most measurements in one measuring system have very similar equivalents in other measuring systems or useful approximations, like a pound being 1/2 a kilo, a liter being about a quart, or a meter being about a yard. Even various ancient chinese measurements can be similar like this. Except the metric system seems to have eschewn the co…

Subway (the fast food chain) calls them "30cm subs", or colloquially "a thirty".

The smaller sandwich is a "15cm sub", or "a fifteen".

Re: The Glass Famine

#50

Post by roryirvine »

polotics wrote: post #36

This gives me sickening vibes of the "War is a racket" take. Both side's agreeing to enable each other's massacre of their own country's downtrodden young masses, while all sorts of profiteering going on at the back no doubt.

Very much a two-way street, that.

The "economist" faction in the British government (that is, those who wanted to fight a limited war, sparing men and materiel) semi-deliberately failed to ramp up domestic production as part of their campaign to constrain the extent of any conflict. Their opponents did the opposite, exaggerating the lack of production as part of their campaign to move the economy much more completely onto a war footing.

It came to the head with the "shell crisis" in 1915 when Lloyd George (previously chief amongst the economists) switched sides and, with the aid of a coordinated series of attacks in the press, caused the fall of the government and its replacement by a coalition.

The coalition massively increased war production by borrowing heavily and taking over huge swathes of the economy. Conscription was introduced, and millions were shipped off to the trenches. Lloyd George soon became prime minister, the military expanded massively, the economy grew, and the war was won.

On the other hand, hundreds of thousands more lives were lost, the increased industrial capacity was largely destroyed in the economic retrenchment of the 1920s, and the unsustainable levels of borrowing almost bankrupted the country (and the Empire in general - with Egypt and India bearing much of the burden).

Of course, Germany also followed the "total war" model and suffered terribly for it too. In both cases, it's hard to say who was driving who - the politicians, the industrialists, or the military. The first stirrings of the Military Industrial Complex, half a century before Eisenhower talked about it.

Post reply on HN