This is a wonderful post, thank you. As a person who has been writing about changes in the labour market I greatly appreciate you shining a light on the human labour and skills that have been lost. A similarly wonderful read (in long form) is David Hepworth's wonderful history of the world's most famous recording studio Abbey Road. Highly recommended.
Thank you Ross. Great recommendation, I just read the introduction and ordered it - "What’s been going on there for over ninety years has called for skills that are musical, chemical, mechanical, technical, interpersonal, logistical, managerial and, romantics might be tempted to add, close to magic"
I like the fact you used the phrase "economic evolution", and not 'economic growth'. The word growth has been gutted, and in relation to economics should be called 'parasitic growth' (where that which is growing (cancerously) eventually kills its host - regarding economics due to Nixon's 1971 decoupleng money from the Gold Standard).
True economic growth is sustainable evolution, and the mantra should be "adapt and die" (rather than adapt or die) as the article suggests with the many examples of dead industries and skills, and then some revival or rediscovery of the value lost.
Reading your post, I couldn't help but wonder whether progress is "always... improving what was before".
Taken individually, it's true. Using the Kodak example, enabling everyone to have a super-powered, mostly-automated camera in their pocket with infinite storage is obviously progress over all the issues with traditional photography: understanding the rules of lighting and aperture, the perils of running out of film at a bad time, etc.
What's lost is the admittedly annoying, inefficient experience of taking your film to a developer.
But that time at the developer, while inefficient, was a *human* encounter. A chance for conversation – what'd you shoot? Where'd you shoot it? Oh maybe next time use the Portra 160 instead of the 400. Whatever.
Progress streamlines so well. And taken in isolation, I'd accept any one improvement. But in aggregate we've streamlined away nearly all our chances for direct human encounter.
This is a wonderful post, thank you. As a person who has been writing about changes in the labour market I greatly appreciate you shining a light on the human labour and skills that have been lost. A similarly wonderful read (in long form) is David Hepworth's wonderful history of the world's most famous recording studio Abbey Road. Highly recommended.
Thank you Ross. Great recommendation, I just read the introduction and ordered it - "What’s been going on there for over ninety years has called for skills that are musical, chemical, mechanical, technical, interpersonal, logistical, managerial and, romantics might be tempted to add, close to magic"
I like the fact you used the phrase "economic evolution", and not 'economic growth'. The word growth has been gutted, and in relation to economics should be called 'parasitic growth' (where that which is growing (cancerously) eventually kills its host - regarding economics due to Nixon's 1971 decoupleng money from the Gold Standard).
True economic growth is sustainable evolution, and the mantra should be "adapt and die" (rather than adapt or die) as the article suggests with the many examples of dead industries and skills, and then some revival or rediscovery of the value lost.
Reading your post, I couldn't help but wonder whether progress is "always... improving what was before".
Taken individually, it's true. Using the Kodak example, enabling everyone to have a super-powered, mostly-automated camera in their pocket with infinite storage is obviously progress over all the issues with traditional photography: understanding the rules of lighting and aperture, the perils of running out of film at a bad time, etc.
What's lost is the admittedly annoying, inefficient experience of taking your film to a developer.
But that time at the developer, while inefficient, was a *human* encounter. A chance for conversation – what'd you shoot? Where'd you shoot it? Oh maybe next time use the Portra 160 instead of the 400. Whatever.
Progress streamlines so well. And taken in isolation, I'd accept any one improvement. But in aggregate we've streamlined away nearly all our chances for direct human encounter.
Is it still progress?