cmaukonen's picture

    What's the difference....two recessions


    Dick Oberholtzer and his wife listening to radio signals from Sputnik I.

    I remember when Sputnik went up. It was so exiting listening to for the Beep Beep signals on an old crummy shortwave receiver.  It was like having a new toy to play with.  And getting that first one transistor radio kit for my birthday. 

    Going with my father to the local TV and Radio store and seeing color television for the first time.  You had to watch it in a darkened room because the picture was pretty dim. And the color was not too good either. Faces were kind of orange and the grass had this look of a poorly done painting about it. But it was color and neat to watch. The sets were very expensive and had one size picture tube. My grandfather got one and I remember that it was hard to see except in the evening. But that is when my grandparents and my parents would watch. My father was red green color blind so not very impressed with it. But people wanted one because it was color.

    I also remember the first space flights and we even would listen to them in school. This was real history happening and the whole school would be listening to the events over the school PA system.  I remember my father getting a transistor radio. I wound up with it. It was small and had a tiny speaker and did not sound very good. But it had transistors and everybody wanted one.  

    That whole period from after WWII through the late 1970s it seemed like one new thing after another.  Television, satellites, color television, men in space then going to the moon, transistors and then integrated circuits. Rockets and jet aircraft. Solid state audio. Companies like SAE and Phase Linear and Dynaco all had big high power amplifiers. Remember Southwest Technical  Products ?  With their Tiger amplifier kits and later 6800 microcomputer kits and keyboard and terminal kits. MITS and IMSI microcomputers.

    Boom boxes started to show up in the 1970s. They were big and loud and had much better sound than the transistor radios of the past. But they weighed a ton because of all the D cell batteries needed to get all that sound.

    Shortwave radio listening got big as well with the new solid state shortwave receivers. Some even having a digital display to show you exactly what frequency you were tuned too.  And nearly every shortwave broadcaster had a program dedicated to this particular interest.


    By the time the 1980s came interest int all these things began to fade.  Microcomputers were still mostly the province of the geeks and hobbyists.   IBM and Apple had yet to have their PCs and computer graphics were still only something that was done on big, expensive mainframe type machines that were in Universities and Research institutions.  Sales sagged. Where I lived we had 4 Stereo stores and by the time the 1980s came we had one. And this was way before Circuit City and Best Buy.  Not including the Stereo stores in the malls.  By the mid 80s these were gone as well.   The local computer hobbyist stores were fading too. 

    But by the late 1980s the Personal Computer started to emerge as something the average person could afford and actually use. IBM and Apple followed by Radio Shack and Commodore  started coming out with all in one units or complete systems. They could run applications other than Basic and soon had color displays as well.  By the 1990s dial up communications to networks had been established. Also cellular communications started to become popular as well. Based on the technologies used by  Ham Radio operators and Public Safety using repeaters and phone patching techniques as well as diversity communications. The first cell phones were big and bulky and weight considerably. Not something one could put to ones ear.  Sales of all this stuff soared.  Lap top computers began to show up. The Zenith laptop was one of the first.

    Digital recording took off as well. Using the same technology as CDs did. With audio cards beginning to show up with professional quality but inexpensive enough for anyone to get. And everyone but everyone was putting together a home recording studio. All imagining themselves as another Allen Parsons.  But as time went on even interest in this faded as people got hit with the reality that electronic goodies does not a musician make.  You actually have to have some talent and ability.  MP3 players began to take the place of cassette players and cell phones became common place.  Computer networking came into it's own with cable connections and DSL and now even fiber in some places.  Computers became faster and smaller and easier to use. The software more robust and user friendly.

    As PCs took hold in the home they too took over from the big mainframe computers. Universities and research institutions began to dump their big iron.  Networked servers and the World Wide Web took the stage.  Technology went from being neat and new and exciting to something that was taken for granted, like a washing machine or a toaster.  Satellite and cable TV along with DVD and now down loadable movies and audio taking the place of movie theaters and CDs and what not.

    And what it the point of all this ? For one thing when economists and historians speak of how our and the worlds economy is technology driven the leave out one important facet.  The psychological part of it. All these things were, for a while in the beginning, neat and new and exciting.  They also leave out the fact that as the technology advanced, the fewer and fewer people are needed to implement it and make it available to the masses.

    Its what I call the adrenaline factor.  Each new thing that I mentioned was emotionally invigorating. Exciting and fun. People wanted this stuff.


    But now were are at a period where the current new things are not so exciting and new and interesting. That is not to say the current research in photovoltaics or electric transportation is not  important. Or the medical discoveries not inspiring. It's just that they do not invoke the same kind of excitement that the discoveries of the past do.

    So as to the difference between the last economic down turn, the one in the early 1980s and now is that there is little that is exhilarating in the immediate future for most people.  In the 1980s and the others that preceded, people believed that things would get better, that there was something new and inspiring and appealing on the horizon.  This is not so much true today. We have hit a plateau. 

    Add to that  a general unease about the world in general and now a certain cynicism about technology in itself and whether it can fix out problems.  We as a country have a long history of exiting new vistas. From the very first people to set foot on it.  We can claim a lot of firsts.   But we have nearly run out of firsts and even seconds. We are having a very difficult time now adjusting to not having the national emotional stimuli we had in the past.  

    We do not know how to just be.

    Comments

    I haven't been around as long as you, cmauk, but this sounds like a pretty subjective way to gauge societal change. Perhaps, it's not the world that has changed, but you? Speaking for myself, I was pretty damn excited for my first computer--spent most my bar-mitzvah money on it. I fondly recall the succession of ever improving computers and game consoles the way you fondly recall transistor radios and color televisions. These days, I'm passionate about my iPhone and my Kindle.

    Of course, in general, the world does not seem as new and exciting to me as when I was a kid, but that's not because the world has changed. That's because I'm not a kid anymore. [Shakes cane at passerby.]


    I will admit that I have changed but the world has also changed as well. Don't know that many people excited about green technologies except the greens. Hard to get that same feeling about fuel cells you did with space flight.

    I am sure your first computer was as exiting to you as my first stereo kit was to me. But I still say that the feeling I get with people in general is not the same excitement one felt with back even in the 1980s.

     


    Whipper snapper ! Smile


    Old fart!


    let me put it another way. It's the "Been there, done that." factor.  Do you get excited about having to get a new car...assuming you have one ? Or a new pair of pants ? Probably a little but not like when you got your first car, I'll bet.

    The space race was exciting but after the third or forth shuttle, not so much.  You simply cannot quantitatively express that which is an emotional response. People to do not respond in a nice mathematical, logical manner. That is why most economists and political pundits and politicians get it wrong.  It's why the medicare cuts went down in flames even with the republican constituency.


    I think the been-there-done-that factor is a good point, one that I didn't initially draw from your post. I don't agree that everything is been-there-done-that these days--which I still maintain is primarily a factor of age and experience--but I do agree the difference between innovations and exciting novelty is an important one that economists may not pay enough attention to.

    I would also add the gee-whiz factor. Flying to the moon is really, really cool, even if it didn't really do much for us.


    I would also add the gee-whiz factor. Flying to the moon is really, really cool, even if it didn't really do much for us.

    Of course it is. I think it would be neat to do.


    Don't remember Southwest Technical ... but I was a big fan of Heathkit.

    I'm not agreeing entirely. I mean, just yesterday Intel announced one of the most exciting advances in IC technology since the creation of the original microchip. It may be a bit in the techie-weeds for some (I *almost* did a post on it ... but didn't figure it really fits in).  We totally get to claim this as a first ... and it's a big horizon. There are SO many more possibilities now - my mind is still kind of trying to wrap around what this means for design.

    Not unrelated. In the consumer sector, mobile technology is expanding by leaps and bounds. For many people these gadgets are very much as "gotta have it" as any boom box or walkman or whatever period-defining product you'd like to choose. Especially for the youth who view them as you did your first radio kit. The things really are cool as hell - that much hardware packed into such a little device is amazing. And while we don't necessarily have exclusive claim to this as a "first" Apple and Google are driving the industry.

    I do agree that they aren't inspiring people to believe things will get better. The reason, I think, isn't because the innovations themselves aren't inspiring or groundbreaking. It's that the pinnacle of opportunity these advances provide Americans can be epitomized by highlighting they are manufactured by people who work 16 hours a day six days a week for an official salary of $138  per month (reported salaries seems to be around $98) ... and those are the HIGH PAID ones. Neat innovations - they just don't significantly benefit many beyond the modern slavers. With a half-dozen new free trade agreements (one of which seems to potentially open our markets to products produced in N. Korea's "free trade" zone) what, exactly, is there to look forward to?

    A nice piping-hot pie becomes far less exciting when you know damn well you won't be getting a piece. It's still a nice pie though.


    I kind of agree on some points. I'm not saying that what's new is not exciting to a certain sector of the population but to the public as a whole, I don't think it's as much of a big deal. Not something that would have people in every little burg standing in line to get.

    It would be nice to put money and energy into green technology and infrastructure but to Joe Blow, it's just not sexy enough.  And as you said the monetary aspects do not effect many people. And even those under payed foreign workers do not actually make the products. That's done on a machine..automated...they may put the boards into the cases, but that's about it. 

    So moving it back here would not have as big an effect as one might like to believe. Just more low level work for low wages.

    But this is just part of it. A part that cannot be ignored, though.

    The space race was mega sexy. New bridges, and bullet trains not so much.


    Have you seen the lines that form for every new Apple product release? One group of psychos sat on line for over three days. I don't remember that happening when computers were introduced.

    Actually, many stages of manufacturing are not nearly as robotic as you imagine. The chips themselves are to a large extent, but a lot of post-production work and all of the assembly (component and device) is done by hand - often including the baseboard soldering. This is done by lower-profile workers that the Corporations try and pretend they don't know about. Apple, for instance, was steadfast in refusing to confirm it's association with United Win for years. They finally admitted it was their devices earlier this year but still aren't really engaging.

    It is common practice for Western companies to refuse to disclose ANY of their manufacturing partners beyond Foxconn so it is mostly impossible to check real conditions. A report by apple found that 54% of their suppliers broke the 60 hour work limit over half the time and 39% failed to meet Apple's "good enough for the third world" workplace safety standards. One of the three partners caught employing child labor had their contract terminated though, so it's all good.

    Now, I give Apple a bit of a hard time. But honestly they really represent the height of corporate responsibility in this regard. Everyone else does the exact same things without providing even a "third world standards" code of conduct or any oversight at all beyond QA and production targets.


    I guess you have knowledge of this that I do not have. All of the board manufacturing I have come across has been automated with multi layer boards and parts placement machines that also to the soldering of the boards.

    Having dealt with board houses myself for smaller projects.  I have hand assembled boards with SMD parts and it is not fun. With out the appropriate placement tools it's very difficult and time consuming.


    Honestly, "often" was an overstatement - especially paired with the word baseboard. Lazy sentence.


    It China is still manually making the boards they are not nearly as advanced as they or others would like us to think. That is old and very prone to error as well as worker accidents.

    The term button shoes comes to mind here.


    This is how I've seen it done.


    But this is how I've always seen them *finished*. There is DIP and also optional components.


    I watched the video of the tour on youtube. That technology is way out of date for PCB manufacturing. They can only make money that way by paying dirt wages.

    All but the final assembly can be automated now. I have seen it done. Even attaching the board to the case. All that is left is some plugging of wires and putting the case together.

    FYI that was the way everything was made here...a long time ago. Lots of people hand soldering, assembling the chassis etc.

     


    Riiight. Like $98 a month for over 60 hours a week.

    You tell me which process they're using.


    Which begs another question. Are Apples profits do to them selling so many of these toys or because their mark up is outrageous ? I personally suspect the latter rather than the former.


    I didn't realize there was any question. To me the latter seems obvious. What I'm seeing over and over and over is:

    -Fire all the American workers

    -Ship the equipment to 3rd world ("emerging") nation.

    -Hire foreign workers for dirt.

    <<<Bypass import tariff here>>>

    -Sell the product for just enough less than the American producers can afford, cutting them out of the market (competitive).
    (or)
    -Sell the product as a luxury good at top dollar (exclusive).

    It's being done it with everything from high tech to sawmills (Stimpson Lumber, Post Falls, last guy out put the mill on a truck headed to China). We're shipping logs and reimporting cut lumber for chrisssake. It is horribly inefficient for any reason other than they don't have to pay for labor by doing it that way. I genuinely don't think I'm overstating it to call this a modern form of employing slaves. They harnass conditions that would result in criminal penalties if they existed in the Western world. How the fuck is ANYONE supposed to compete with that? Education sure isn't gonna do it.


    I guess outrageous is in the eye of the beholder. But this is the breakdown.

    The company estimates the bill of materials of the CDMA iPhone 4 at $171.35, which is down from $187.51 of the original iPhone 4 that is currently sold at AT&T. The number climbs to $178.45, if assembly is included and we conclude that Apple has just dropped its production cost by about 9% and the margin climbs to about 70%, excluding packaging, shipping, R&D as well as marketing and operational expenses.

    So, they pay around $7.10 to get all the parts put together.


    Typical American corporate thinking. Shoot for the lowest possible denominator because it's cheap.


    And just to round out to my larger point: Foxconn has around a million workers. United Win has about 18,000 (apparently wiping down iPhone screens). And these are just two in the manufacturing chain. Obviously, there *are* jobs doing *something* that require humans ... as we wander off into the weeds discussing what, exactly, that might be.


    My interpretation of this psychological phenomenon is that the difference lies not in the inherent nature of older technologies themselves, or in any superiority to the technologies of today in their admirable wizardry, but in the vanished social context in which the older technologies were developed.  Those technologies from previous generations were developed in a context of profound and ambitious social hopes, and a belief in human progress and perfectability. People still dreamed big and vivid dreams of a socially wonderful future yet to be.  It was taken for granted that part of the purpose of society, and of all our technological efforts, was to formulate and strive for these large ideals.  As a result, technological improvements were received as encouraging steps on the long road to that better and very different day.

    I see little left of this kind of profound hope and ambition in our contemporary culture and politics.  Most of the large dreams have been displaced by the furtive desire-quenching and relatively meaningless, end-of-history hedonism of neoliberal man.  Even our brightest and most energetic youth pride themsleves on their pragmatic lack of utopian spirit, and on the near-term groundedness of their pleasures and desires.  But it is hard to identify any point in all that satisfaction-seeking, at least one that extends beyond the personal sphere and limited lifespan of the individual.

    I have read some of the works of some current-day futurists, and many of their prognoses seem to offer, at best, little more than marginal improvements in the efficient satisfaction of shallow and merely personal wants in a society that will still be structured much as our own society is structured.  Most of the technologies that continue to emerge are offered as lttle more than labor-saving tools for satisying limited, selfish and frequently ignoble desires; or as just fun accoutrments in the prolongation a perpetual sameness and eveydayness.

    I find something poignant and tragic in the outlook of the younger generations of today's people.  I fear we have done something really horrible, but obscurely and puzzlingly horrible, to our youth.  We have killed their social imaginations.  What is worse is that they frequently don't even have a grasp of how limited are the horizons of their hopes and dreams.  They don't feel particularly bad, and indeed life is relatively fun for them, so they don't clearly perceive what is missing behind the surface gloss of pleasure.

    Our millenial generations seem reasonably cheerful and industrous, and sociable within their own spheres, but somehow emotionally isolated from the bulk of their fellow human beings, and unaffected by any perception of pronounce misery and deep social inadequacy calling for substantial social progress.  Snark and whimsy and ironical self-protection and defensiveness seem to rule the liberal outlook of the day.  Seriousness, gravity and perilously fraught utopian ambition strike the end-of-history pleasure drifters as too psychologically risky and sappy.


    Absolutely on the mark Dan. You said it much better than I.

    And not to be snarkey but...

    What thell happened to the flying car ???


    I think that what I am failing to make clear is that there is not one reason why the economy remains in the dumper. This is a many faceted situation with many contributing factors. Not the least of which is the psychological impact it has on people. The longer it lasts the more difficult it becomes for change as people come to expect unemployment and lousy jobs and lousy income.

    Almost taking on a life of it's own. We risk loosing the will and even the ability to be innovative and risk taking.


    I am glad people are reading this and thinking about it. An aspect that needs to be addressed, though I may not have done such a great job of it myself.


    But now were are at a period where the current new things are not so exciting and new and interesting. That is not to say the current research in photovoltaics or electric transportation is not  important. Or the medical discoveries not inspiring. It's just that they do not invoke the same kind of excitement that the discoveries of the past do.

    You might not know how many people are passionately engaged in home energy projects. Plenty of YouTubes and blogs about do-it-yourself solar and wind projects, and the market for kits and parts for this is on par with the early electronic and computer hobbyist kits. People also modifying and tweaking their electric cars.  Harbor Freight has a solar starter kit for a few hundred bucks, for instance (not even the best deal out there) and they've sold thousands.


    Latest Comments