I think this is an excellent analogy, probably even more so than the author intended, judging by their conclusion. Polyester was first, it was new and exciting, it saturated the market and was...
I think this is an excellent analogy, probably even more so than the author intended, judging by their conclusion.
I'm not suggesting that all of these were good developments - I heavily prioritise natural materials in most situations and often end up paying a premium for it, and there's huge environmental damage from chemical manufacturing, both directly and from the waste its low cost creates by enabling throwaway fast fashion (which in turn is only that cheap because the externalities aren't priced in). But they were developments, we didn't just give up on polyester and then universally return to cotton. The hype cycle chart is real, and it drives consumer behaviour as well as investments - but only the peak and trough tend to make the news, nobody's getting excited about the plateau even though it's the part with lasting impact.
The optimism makes me feel good but I flip back and forth on whether or not I agree. On the one hand, I've watched as low fidelity products carve out a large audience by playing to the parasocial...
The optimism makes me feel good but I flip back and forth on whether or not I agree. On the one hand, I've watched as low fidelity products carve out a large audience by playing to the parasocial relationships. On the other hand, I believe GenAI will get so good and iterate so fast that it could adapt to any changes in trends faster than we've ever encountered before.
But it was just nice to read the comparison to polyester and think about how humans have always found an excuse to drop the logical, popular product for the imperfect, romanticized one.
I feel like this article's intended point ignores the fact that a majority of fiber production is still polyester. It's not that people swung back to cotton, but more that the industry took some...
I feel like this article's intended point ignores the fact that a majority of fiber production is still polyester. It's not that people swung back to cotton, but more that the industry took some time to figure out the cheapest configuration that was still acceptable to consumers. That configuration is still mostly polyester.
I don't buy it. For every polyester, there's . . . well, everything else in contemporary mass media, food, furniture . . . hell, even clothing is not really a promising example: it is well known...
I don't buy it. For every polyester, there's . . . well, everything else in contemporary mass media, food, furniture . . . hell, even clothing is not really a promising example: it is well known that the overall quality and durability of easily-accessible clothing has been going down for decades. Cheap always wins.
I think this is an excellent analogy, probably even more so than the author intended, judging by their conclusion.
Polyester was first, it was new and exciting, it saturated the market and was wedged into a whole swathe of situations where it wasn't optimal or sometimes even appropriate, and it fell out of favour as the novelty wore off. Meanwhile, research into synthetic fibers continued, developed, and refined: even as pure synthetics became passé, blended fabrics crept in at all levels of fashion, often for cost but sometimes for functional reasons too; technical materials absolutely transformed sportswear, bad weather gear, and even PPE; extreme cases like Kevlar and Nomex were discovered and put to use in scenarios where there weren't previously any good options at all.
I'm not suggesting that all of these were good developments - I heavily prioritise natural materials in most situations and often end up paying a premium for it, and there's huge environmental damage from chemical manufacturing, both directly and from the waste its low cost creates by enabling throwaway fast fashion (which in turn is only that cheap because the externalities aren't priced in). But they were developments, we didn't just give up on polyester and then universally return to cotton. The hype cycle chart is real, and it drives consumer behaviour as well as investments - but only the peak and trough tend to make the news, nobody's getting excited about the plateau even though it's the part with lasting impact.
The optimism makes me feel good but I flip back and forth on whether or not I agree. On the one hand, I've watched as low fidelity products carve out a large audience by playing to the parasocial relationships. On the other hand, I believe GenAI will get so good and iterate so fast that it could adapt to any changes in trends faster than we've ever encountered before.
But it was just nice to read the comparison to polyester and think about how humans have always found an excuse to drop the logical, popular product for the imperfect, romanticized one.
I feel like this article's intended point ignores the fact that a majority of fiber production is still polyester. It's not that people swung back to cotton, but more that the industry took some time to figure out the cheapest configuration that was still acceptable to consumers. That configuration is still mostly polyester.
I don't buy it. For every polyester, there's . . . well, everything else in contemporary mass media, food, furniture . . . hell, even clothing is not really a promising example: it is well known that the overall quality and durability of easily-accessible clothing has been going down for decades. Cheap always wins.
I need to find a way to leave society.