I'm really disapointed by the lack of deeper analysis of the humanitarian and environmental cost of this progress. E.g. Lithium mines, increased energy consumption (i.e. Coal and natural gas), and...
I'm really disapointed by the lack of deeper analysis of the humanitarian and environmental cost of this progress. E.g. Lithium mines, increased energy consumption (i.e. Coal and natural gas), and the modern slavery that arises when manufacturing for the west is out of sight and mind.
Is that really all that relevant to the article, especially for the 1990 - 2020 block? The majority of these are improvements in human knowledge / society, not manufacturing.
Is that really all that relevant to the article, especially for the 1990 - 2020 block? The majority of these are improvements in human knowledge / society, not manufacturing.
Very much so. Advances in human society that don't advance everyone in an equal manner means that while one (small) part of society is enjoying all of these advancements, others are still...
Very much so. Advances in human society that don't advance everyone in an equal manner means that while one (small) part of society is enjoying all of these advancements, others are still suffering from starvation and forced labor.
One of the tiniest examples would be the Libram 5 USA. It's $1200 more than the normal model (already considered too expensive). The primary differentiating factor is that most parts are sourced from USA and Germany. Not even accounting for raw material sourcing (which can and does have slavery), they are paid less because companies can, and part of the reason they can is less availability of these societal and technological advancements.
Applying this across the board, and it means that human cost should be weighed against the advancement.
It gets even murkier when you start talking environmental costs as well. At what point are these technological improvements outweighed by the mountains of electronics waste?
Many, many of these improvements are superficial. Some are regressing (hello internet data caps!).
The article does make some fine points, but I also agree a more in-depth study of the externalities would be nice. I know shipping costs have decreased in part due to warehouse workers needing to pee in bottles to not be fired.
I'm really disapointed by the lack of deeper analysis of the humanitarian and environmental cost of this progress. E.g. Lithium mines, increased energy consumption (i.e. Coal and natural gas), and the modern slavery that arises when manufacturing for the west is out of sight and mind.
Is that really all that relevant to the article, especially for the 1990 - 2020 block? The majority of these are improvements in human knowledge / society, not manufacturing.
Very much so. Advances in human society that don't advance everyone in an equal manner means that while one (small) part of society is enjoying all of these advancements, others are still suffering from starvation and forced labor.
One of the tiniest examples would be the Libram 5 USA. It's $1200 more than the normal model (already considered too expensive). The primary differentiating factor is that most parts are sourced from USA and Germany. Not even accounting for raw material sourcing (which can and does have slavery), they are paid less because companies can, and part of the reason they can is less availability of these societal and technological advancements.
Applying this across the board, and it means that human cost should be weighed against the advancement.
It gets even murkier when you start talking environmental costs as well. At what point are these technological improvements outweighed by the mountains of electronics waste?
Many, many of these improvements are superficial. Some are regressing (hello internet data caps!).
The article does make some fine points, but I also agree a more in-depth study of the externalities would be nice. I know shipping costs have decreased in part due to warehouse workers needing to pee in bottles to not be fired.