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

Computers Reduce Efficiency: Case Studies of the Solow Paradox (2023)

scottlocklin.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 92 posts

Re: Computers Reduce Efficiency: Case Studies of the Solow Paradox (2023)

#41

Post by SiempreViernes »

GTP wrote: post #11
rbanffy wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I couldn’t decide whether they had a valid point or whether they were engaging in some form of parody. Seems like an extreme case of Poe’s Law.

I think that if you filter-out the exaggerations in the article, the general message is still worth to reflect on. Some process doesn't get more efficient just by virtue of using a computer, and many tools we have now are more about good-looking interfaces than actual productivity.

Sure, every fable has a grain of truth, but constantcrying put it more usefully here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40264453

The OP is not worth reading unless you desperately miss the "ironic" invective laden writing of the early 00's.

Re: Computers Reduce Efficiency: Case Studies of the Solow Paradox (2023)

#42

Post by __MatrixMan__ »

rini17 wrote: post #32
virtue3 wrote: post #17

I think this article is drastically downplaying how dramatically more complicated designs and things are now than they were before. I don't believe it's computers that are to blame; I believe it's complexity nightmare problem. We have much tighter tolerances for everything now; everything "does more" and relies on my components. Back when we used pen and paper to create military vehicles it was mostly JUST about perf…

And what about financial services mentioned in the articles? Doubt that "everything does more" there.

Oh yeah, also some parts have cancer. Tumors can take a lot to maintain.

Re: Computers Reduce Efficiency: Case Studies of the Solow Paradox (2023)

#43

Post by JKCalhoun »

Samtidsfobiker wrote: post #27

I too have wondered why it take so long to make stuff in CAD, and why even suggesting that everything should fit together the first time is laughable at best. My theory is that computers can't do rough sketching. No CAD software suite (I think) can iterate and evalute rough ideas as fast and flexible as whiteboard pen in a meeting room can.

That's the way I see it.

Just as an example I am familiar with: so many people appear to begin a project like a MAME cabinet with SketchUp.

I like "Cardboard Assisted Design" and have literally built several MAME cabinet prototypes in cardboard where iteration is easy with merely a box-cutter knife.

When the ergonomics and part-fitting is "go", I take measurements from the cardboard proto and move to wood.

Designing acrylic parts for later laser-cutting I have also used "CAD" for prototyping — sometimes even flat-bed scanning the chipboard prototype and then moving to a vector drawing app to overlay the laser-friendly beziers.

Even for PCB layout I often will laser-print the PCB as a final sanity check: punching holes in the paper and shoving the actual electronic components in to see that everything will fit before I send the file off to Taiwan.

Re: Computers Reduce Efficiency: Case Studies of the Solow Paradox (2023)

#44

Post by mrob »

p_l wrote: post #36
hulitu wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> everything "does more" Windows 2000 GUI was much more complex than the Windows 10 or 11 GUI. Yet Windows 10 and 11 have difficulties painting the screen (glitches, black screens for a second, and so on).

The amount of pixels that had to be rendered and pushed, as well as certain lower security in windows 2000, meant that just the pushing of pixels was simpler compared to today. Windows 11 graphic path even for same application code as on windows 2000 is way more complex, and arguably most of that complexity is warranted and needed . Otherwise you get unfortunate side effects like simple text editor using surprisingly…

The main benefit of 4K displays is sharper vector fonts. It's very important to imitate the exact shapes of print fonts, so despite sharp fonts already being available for decades in bitmap form, we've got to push those pixels.

Likewise, it's very important to know the exact Z-order of the window stack at all times, despite only interacting with one at a time. This means it's absolutely necessary to render translucent drop shadows for each window, which obviously need some Gaussian blur. A simple blitter won't cut it. And better add some subtle translucency to the window decorations too, just in case the shadows are obscured.

Don't forget the mandatory rounded corners, gradient fills, and animations. How can the user know the computer's actually working if things aren't sliding about the screen?

Of course, it's important to remove useless features, like theming. If users are permitted self-expression they might start getting the wrong idea about who really controls the machine.

Re: Computers Reduce Efficiency: Case Studies of the Solow Paradox (2023)

#45

Post by cedilla »

sourcepluck wrote: post #15
TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #4

What's with a lot of the mentions of “computer” using what looks like a portmanteau with “retard”?! I know some famous people like Stallman do this, but I don't think it's perceived positively.

Provide a link to Stallman using that term then please? Otherwise, I'm calling nonsense. I'd be 95+% sure you're making that up, or confused in this case.

He's not using "computard" but he loves to undermine his credibility by talking about the "Amazon Swindle" and such.

Re: Computers Reduce Efficiency: Case Studies of the Solow Paradox (2023)

#46

Post by pnut »

flavaz wrote: post #7

A classic example of this would be how some roles require endless spreadsheets, or individual updates to a CRM tool like Pipedrive. CRM tools add a lot of overhead to what should be a simple process- letting your manager know what you’re up to.

I'm not a CRM end user, but I'd be very grateful for such a tool if I had to suddenly cover for a coworker, or inherit an existing business relationship. What is the alternative, each person individually cobbles together some godawful workflow management system? With no centralised repository of information?

Totally unsustainable, and not at all related to keeping your manager informed.

Re: Computers Reduce Efficiency: Case Studies of the Solow Paradox (2023)

#47

Post by [deleted] »

constantcrying wrote: post #30

It definitely is true that a design which could easily be created by hand is harder to create on a computer. The things where computers shine are actually managimg the complexity of a large and complicated systems. What I think the article leaves unspoken (but implied) is the "curse of tools", if you give a person tools he is likely to use them, even if they might not be applicable. Meaning that someone might decide…

[deleted]

Re: Computers Reduce Efficiency: Case Studies of the Solow Paradox (2023)

#48

Post by dimask »

constantcrying wrote: post #30

It definitely is true that a design which could easily be created by hand is harder to create on a computer. The things where computers shine are actually managimg the complexity of a large and complicated systems. What I think the article leaves unspoken (but implied) is the "curse of tools", if you give a person tools he is likely to use them, even if they might not be applicable. Meaning that someone might decide…

> The things where computers shine are actually managimg the complexity of a large and complicated systems.

I would argue that where computers shine, firstmost, is automating repeated tasks. Even if a task is fairly simple in complexity and doing it by hand takes less time, if you have to repeat the same task over and over it may be beneficial to use computer tools that allow some automation, even if in the first couple of runs this is gonna take more time. In this sense, something being easier to do by hand (once) does not necessarily imply that it is better to do it by hand.

But I do agree that an increase in complexity comes as a curse of tools. People with less tech-understanding may be more easy to get what some benefits of such tools are, but the problems that increased complexity brings takes longer to catch them.

Re: Computers Reduce Efficiency: Case Studies of the Solow Paradox (2023)

#49

Post by PopAlongKid »

mcphage wrote: post #25
virtue3 wrote: post #17

I think this article is drastically downplaying how dramatically more complicated designs and things are now than they were before. I don't believe it's computers that are to blame; I believe it's complexity nightmare problem. We have much tighter tolerances for everything now; everything "does more" and relies on my components. Back when we used pen and paper to create military vehicles it was mostly JUST about perf…

> Back when we used pen and paper to create military vehicles it was mostly JUST about performance and completing the objective. There wasn't thousands upon thousands of other requirements and features (whether or not this is a good thing is debatable). It makes me wonder if this piling-on of requirements is also enabled or encouraged by computers. I agree that things are becoming more complex, but I’m thinking compu…

The U.S. tax code is certainly far more complex than it would otherwise be if not for computers.
Post reply on HN