|
Paladinus posted:How do you propose a company stays in business if they only ever produced one single product that they've completely met demand for for the foreseeable future? If they don't come up with a new product, they literally have nothing else to do on the market. The problem is that selling the product is profitable, but the rate of sales isn't increasing exponentially. So the company could certainly stay in business, but the stock price wouldn't keep going up forever. If it was just a family owned business they'd probably be fine making X units a year in perpetuity.
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 19:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 16:47 |
|
|
mawarannahr posted:It's literally centrally planned and legally enforced obsolescence No. You've stretched the term to be meaningless if you're including safety laws requiring PM and replacement based on expected equipment lifespan. e: Like we can have a different conversation about regulatory capture or unintended consequences of code, but this situation as laid out here ain't planned obsolescence. Unless you'd categorize OSHA enforcing the 30 day lifespan on a 3m ammonia cart as centrally planned and legally enforced obsolescence. Coolness Averted has issued a correction as of 20:30 on Sep 23, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 20:17
|
|
|
Coolness Averted posted:No. You've stretched the term to be meaningless if you're including safety laws requiring PM and replacement based on expected equipment lifespan. Old automobiles can be very dangerous, but if one passes all inspections it's still allowed on the road (at least I'm not aware of any countries where the age of the car, as opposed to its actual state, ecological characteristics or something else was the deciding factor). I imagine there is something apart from just safety concerns behind those Australian laws. Otherwise, they would just inspect gas meters and tell everyone individually when to get a new.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 20:49
|
|
|
Paladinus posted:Old automobiles can be very dangerous, but if one passes all inspections it's still allowed on the road (at least I'm not aware of any countries where the age of the car, as opposed to its actual state, ecological characteristics or something else was the deciding factor). I imagine there is something apart from just safety concerns behind those Australian laws. Otherwise, they would just inspect gas meters and tell everyone individually when to get a new. boy that sounds much more efficient! let's shut off the gas service to the home while we remove the gas meter and take it to the lab for metallurgical testing to make sure it's not on the verge of a leak or failure, you know, those things that have catastrophic effects like "entire house detonates". then we'll go back and install it in the home again. and do this 1500 times per day.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 20:55
|
|
|
StrugglingHoneybun posted:CSPAM > capitalism.png: it may not be feasible to remain profitable
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 21:05
|
|
|
Weatherman posted:boy that sounds much more efficient! let's shut off the gas service to the home while we remove the gas meter and take it to the lab for metallurgical testing to make sure it's not on the verge of a leak or failure, you know, those things that have catastrophic effects like "entire house detonates". then we'll go back and install it in the home again. and do this 1500 times per day. Wait, you don't have gas meter inspections between changes?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 21:06
|
|
|
Paladinus posted:Old automobiles can be very dangerous, but if one passes all inspections it's still allowed on the road (at least I'm not aware of any countries where the age of the car, as opposed to its actual state, ecological characteristics or something else was the deciding factor). I imagine there is something apart from just safety concerns behind those Australian laws. Otherwise, they would just inspect gas meters and tell everyone individually when to get a new. Would you say state requirements on swapping out solonoid and pressure relief valves in hazardous chemical storage rather than sending out engineers to inspect each valve is also a case of something fishy?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 21:07
|
|
|
Paladinus posted:Wait, you don't have gas meter inspections between changes? Is this a bit?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 21:08
|
|
|
I don't know, maybe there is a completely valid reason why in Australia they just change gas meters every ten years without inspection, but where I live we have mandatory inspections every two years. E: I don't have gas at my current place, but the last time I had my gas meter changed was when it was only 6 years old. I don't know if it would have exploded in the next 4 years, but I'd rather not risk it. Paladinus has issued a correction as of 21:22 on Sep 23, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 21:18
|
|
|
Paladinus posted:I don't know, maybe there is a completely valid reason why in Australia they just change gas meters every ten years without inspection, but where I live we have mandatory inspections every two years. Different jurisdictions will handle stuff differently. Areas you've lived could have mandated the use of meters and utility hookups with a 25 year lifespan, so 10 year replacement made no sense. It's also likely an area that just hasn't had problems with explosions from failed equipment doesn't have relevent code or doesn't enforce what's on the book. I also have the hunch that 2 year visual inspection was probably more to make sure no one was stealing from the utility rather than ensuring safety.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 21:34
|
|
|
Coolness Averted posted:Different jurisdictions will handle stuff differently. They were also checking for gas leaks and cracks with some kind of a fancy detector. All I know is with water meters things are much easier. Why wouldn't Australia use meters with a longer lifespan then or at least differentiate based on the type?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 21:57
|
|
|
Coolness Averted posted:No. You've stretched the term to be meaningless if you're including safety laws requiring PM and replacement based on expected equipment lifespan. sounds like a handout in both cases OP
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 22:31
|
|
|
part of the reason anti-obesity drugs are mega expensive is that pharma has been chasing them for 30 years now and they have poured absolutely insane amounts of money down the drain to get to the point of having one (1) anti-obesity drug that doesn't make your heart explode or w/e. drug discovery is genuinely expensive, so much so that charging way too much for the final product is the only thing they can do in a capitalist context to continue running and finding more drugs. not that i think they're weeping about charging a ton of money or anything but that's the financial reality it's almost like the entire industry should be publicly run so that those kinds of considerations don't have to be taken into account
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 23:13
|
|
|
Jazerus posted:part of the reason anti-obesity drugs are mega expensive is that pharma has been chasing them for 30 years now and they have poured absolutely insane amounts of money down the drain to get to the point of having one (1) anti-obesity drug that doesn't make your heart explode or w/e. drug discovery is genuinely expensive, so much so that charging way too much for the final product is the only thing they can do in a capitalist context to continue running and finding more drugs. not that i think they're weeping about charging a ton of money or anything but that's the financial reality 
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 23:17
|
|
|
Paladinus posted:Why wouldn't Australia use meters with a longer lifespan then or at least differentiate based on the type? Safety engineering is actually a really fascinating and complex field where it's often a lot easier to guarantee zero or almost zero random failures within a certain span of time than it is to guarantee an average "lifetime" before a failure. For similar reasons basically every critical part on an airplane has a finite amount of time you're allowed to use it, even if it's still "fine" when it's eventually taken out of service.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2023 01:03
|
|
|
Also just because they're changed out every 10 years doesn't mean the old ones are simply discarded. We have a ten year changeout on certain highly safety sensitive equipment at my job. The devices we remove are torn down and fully rebuilt and then placed back into service for another 10 years if they are in suitable condition, or salvaged for parts if they are not, which is quite rare.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2023 01:07
|
|
|
reading around it sounds like a common type of regulation that's due to concerns about drifting accuracy meaning you might not be paying as much for your gas as you ought to be. hand out 🖐️
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2023 01:10
|
|
|
mawarannahr posted:reading around it sounds like a common type of regulation that's due to concerns about drifting accuracy meaning you might not be paying as much for your gas as you ought to be. hand out 🖐️ lol no surprises here
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2023 01:13
|
|
|
Exodus1984 posted:The banker could spend as much on shoes as they want, they're lasting 3+ years because working in an office (or remotely) is much more low impact than any work where a person is on their feet every day. I had dress shoes where I wore a noticeable part of the heel away after just a year since I guess you can compensate for the expected lax operating conditions by making them out of the worst materials you can source.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2023 01:35
|
|
|
Shame Boy posted:Safety engineering is actually a really fascinating and complex field where it's often a lot easier to guarantee zero or almost zero random failures within a certain span of time than it is to guarantee an average "lifetime" before a failure. For similar reasons basically every critical part on an airplane has a finite amount of time you're allowed to use it, even if it's still "fine" when it's eventually taken out of service. I would also add that long tail risks are extremely expensive when they happen. it’s generally cheaper and prudent to deal with them preventively even when they have extremely low incidence rates.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2023 01:58
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:I had dress shoes where I wore a noticeable part of the heel away after just a year since I guess you can compensate for the expected lax operating conditions by making them out of the worst materials you can source.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2023 02:13
|
|
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:A traditional thrifty tip was to put rubber soles and heels on the shoes as soon as you got them. That way, when you wear through the sole, you just rip it off and put on a new one. You could bring your shoes to the shoe repair place and have the heel taps replaced any time you felt it was needed. that would make me too tall
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2023 02:19
|
|
|
cooking your toast for 3 mins instead of 4 is planned obsolescence imo
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2023 02:26
|
|
|
Paladinus posted:That's just government-mandated planned obsolescence. The point of the gas meter example is that even a product that lasts a relatively long time still has significant ongoing demand, for new construction or replacement of existing units. You are being wilfully obtuse Also this: PerniciousKnid posted:The problem is that selling the product is profitable, but the rate of sales isn't increasing exponentially. So the company could certainly stay in business, but the stock price wouldn't keep going up forever. If it was just a family owned business they'd probably be fine making X units a year in perpetuity. Coolness Averted posted:Different jurisdictions will handle stuff differently. GotLag has issued a correction as of 02:59 on Sep 24, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2023 02:56
|
|
|
I think putting an * on luddites were right is fair, I don't actually know that much about the luddites other than they were definitely right then and still are now because of material conditions. But if resources and production was owned communally rather than individually I think the * starts to gain value. You could potentially argue that technology would still be mostly destructive, but again, there's a solid argument for saying technology and automation might not be that bad if the goal isn't to maximise consumption and increases in numbers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2023 03:30
|
|
|
Idk man I like not dying of smallpox
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2023 03:35
|
|
|
Shame Boy posted:Idk man I like not dying of smallpox
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2023 03:36
|
|
|
I was thinking about that recently, how there was a point within living memory where the whole world came together to vaccinate so many people we literally eradicated a disease from the entire global population, and how comically unthinkable something like that would be today
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2023 03:36
|
|
|
mawarannahr posted:we are destroying biosphere and will kill more than smallpox could ever dream of I don't think the smallpox vaccine did that but ok
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2023 03:37
|
|
|
Shame Boy posted:I don't think the smallpox vaccine did that but ok I assume you are replying to quote:I think putting an * on luddites were right is fair, I don't actually know that much about the luddites other than they were definitely right then and still are now because of material conditions. But if resources and production was owned communally rather than individually I think the * starts to gain value. You could potentially argue that technology would still be mostly destructive, but again, there's a solid argument for saying technology and automation might not be that bad if the goal isn't to maximise consumption and increases in numbers 
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2023 03:41
|
|
|
Yes that post seems to be saying "all modern technology is universally bad but just to different degrees depending on how much we gently caress it up with profit motive" and I'm saying that's obvious bullshit
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2023 03:43
|
|
|
not sure but i suspect its a gem of wisdom from one of the various doom threads
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2023 03:53
|
|
|
Shame Boy posted:Yes that post seems to be saying "all modern technology is universally bad but just to different degrees depending on how much we gently caress it up with profit motive" and I'm saying that's obvious bullshit Actually the post is saying technology can be good actually, I was responding to some poo poo a few pages back where people were suggesting Luddites are right in perpetuity. Not sure if that was clear as I didn't use the quote feature
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2023 03:55
|
|
|
Rock Puncher posted:Actually the post is saying technology can be good actually, I was responding to some poo poo a few pages back where people were suggesting Luddites are right in perpetuity. Not sure if that was clear as I didn't use the quote feature I guess I read "might not be that bad" as "would still be bad, but less" 
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2023 03:59
|
|
|
Technology is cool as hell and ceding it to capitalism is how we got in this mess Love having electricity, running water and sewage , lets make sure everyone has em. Thanks to science I can not want to kill myself Synthetic hormones ftw.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2023 03:59
|
|
|
mawarannahr posted:we are destroying biosphere and will kill more than smallpox could ever dream of Touch grass while you still can
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2023 04:00
|
|
|
Shame Boy posted:I guess I read "might not be that bad" as "would still be bad, but less" Can't say for sure but I think it could work for us without necessarily being destructive, doesn't change that technology comes at a cost but if society isn't geared to maximising consumption then theoretically technology is more purposeful and its benefits might outweigh the real cost to produce it. Maybe I should just have been more decisive in saying tech is not some lost cause and we should join the bonobos
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2023 04:03
|
|
|
Shame Boy posted:I was thinking about that recently, how there was a point within living memory where the whole world came together to vaccinate so many people we literally eradicated a disease from the entire global population, and how comically unthinkable something like that would be today Edit: same with if they made it a political issue, there'd be a lot of Republicans realizing that unlike Covid, unvaccinated people dying actually hits enough of their voter base to it to really hurt them. The Islamic Shock has issued a correction as of 04:21 on Sep 24, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2023 04:18
|
|
|
Jazerus posted:part of the reason anti-obesity drugs are mega expensive is that pharma has been chasing them for 30 years now and they have poured absolutely insane amounts of money down the drain to get to the point of having one (1) anti-obesity drug that doesn't make your heart explode or w/e. drug discovery is genuinely expensive, so much so that charging way too much for the final product is the only thing they can do in a capitalist context to continue running and finding more drugs. not that i think they're weeping about charging a ton of money or anything but that's the financial reality lmao. governments fund medical R&D, not pharmacuticals. Then the government hands off the last mile testing to them, and their marketing budget for dick pills dwarfs any other expendature. it's just handjobs to pharmacy execs because when you give someone a bunch of money they then in turn fund your campaign.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2023 04:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 16:47 |
|
|
Rock Puncher posted:I think putting an * on luddites were right is fair, I don't actually know that much about the luddites other than they were definitely right then and still are now because of material conditions. But if resources and production was owned communally rather than individually I think the * starts to gain value. You could potentially argue that technology would still be mostly destructive, but again, there's a solid argument for saying technology and automation might not be that bad if the goal isn't to maximise consumption and increases in numbers. Rock Puncher posted:Actually the post is saying technology can be good actually, I was responding to some poo poo a few pages back where people were suggesting Luddites are right in perpetuity. Not sure if that was clear as I didn't use the quote feature
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2023 04:23
|
|