[sdiy] Re-spin the classic ICs?

[Metrophage]

Scott, since you are the official "no politics on SDIY" guy, I will
bite just this once! In this case, evidently, politics and economics
are not readily distinguishable (surprise!).

--- Scott Gravenhorst <music.maker at gte.net> wrote:
> It represents  the desires of the majority, that is, we all "vote"
with 
> our money.  The more "votes" a product receives, the better it's 
> chances of longevity.  

If so, then this year I will "vote" directly with my taxes,
contributing tax money to the programs which I want, and letting the
others starve. This is the ultimate test of democratic capitalism which
NO country has been brave enough to undertake. 

Money is not all about desire, in real life it is a system of
measurement which people use for managing resources. A technology. It
is by it's nature symbolic, but not everybody who uses this understands
the fact. Rest assured, those who print it do. 

The problem here is that with pure science (theory) and applied science
(technology), the mass majority does not fundamentally understand what
they are voting on. People are coaxed and guided into desiring what is
readily producable by industry. Why did it take thirty years for the
technology of the microwave oven, the VCR, the cellphone - to mature?
Companies were careful with their money and slowly cultivated a demand.
Your average person did not know that they desired these things before
they existed, they had to be made first (and expensively). Mass
production is slow to start, and slow to die. Look at how much CD-R
machines and media cost ten years ago! Five years ago! Was there ever
any doubt that people desired these? The market was not ready, it
hardly ever is.

It is a little too elitist-sounding for me to be completely comfortable
with, but science and mass-production economy are not very compatable.
Good engineering is often at odds with cheap manufacturing (or
programming...) techniques. The natural laws of biology and physics are
often at odds with the irrational desires people are supposed to have
as good consumers. Advertisement does not even try to sell technology
to people, they try to sell *lifestyles*. Production/Consumption
society is irrational by design, and so cannot even manage its
resources or time effectively. 

A bit stark, but I will go so far as to say that either capital
succeeds, or science succeeds. More people favor the former, because it
is easy. It will be a long struggle which I won't live to see the end
of, but science will prevail, because it is the simple discipline of
understanding what >IS<. I have my ideals and beliefs, but I don't try
to manage the affairs of others based on those. Entertainment is more
popular than reality, but it does not amount to nor change anything.
The consumer is supposed to desire, but the methods of producers are to
exploit desire of the masses, this is strategy. So is economics a
science, using scientific methodology - or is it a psuedo-science which
reflects the contemporary stylistic trends? Where is the underlying
ratio-nality which is supposed to directly connect capital with what it
is communicating the value of? The desires of the consumer? Not really,
the menu gets bigger, but it is written by somebody else. 

(Overly declarative, detailed examples reduced for sake of helping to
keep the list on topic. But if your SDIY involves the use of money,
then it is relevant)

CJ



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com