← Feed
I got lots of responses pointing out technologies that had to be forced on people. I've thought about them. The ones I agree with are:
- Internal Combustion Cars
- Telephones
- LLMs and GenAI
The internal combustion engine in general didn't have to be forced on to people (farmers, for example, loved it both for their tractors and also for other makeshift machines they'd construct around their farms)
Cars as a class didn't have to be forced on people, high society types in big cities loved having electric carriages. They were clean, easy to maintain, and quiet. They were also reliable enough that they didn't get replaced often enough to become an industry.
But, while the rich were driving around in their electric carriages and the poor were walking, taking horse-carriages, taking trains, and riding cable cars (and people were experimenting with electric and steam cars) Henry Ford decided that, if he could get the US government to heavily invest in a roadway system and trick a bunch of municipalities into giving up a bunch of green space and pedestrian space to cars, he could make a lot of money while also leaving people responsible for both driving (which is dangerous and should be left to those who are interested in learning how to do it effectively, not a requirement for participation in society) and maintenance (which is expensive, and prior to Ford was largely a public expense for a public good.)
Cars introduced a lot of new freedoms for people, but were perhaps the worst of the several available alternatives to do that in dozens of ways, and we're still trying to overcome that fallout. There were significantly more (and significantly safer!) transit options in my region before cars.
Cars, as I've said before and taken blowback from, are usually bad. They are, at best, a necessary evil. There was a time when they were not necessary.
Replies (1)
-
Telephones are a really interesting case that end up in a similar situation to Cars, but for different reasons.
Many people loved the concept of the telephone and were eager to use it. Public phones and communal phones and the phone as a replacement for the telegraph were all pretty popular.
But private ownership of telephones resulted in a major upset of etiquette and an erosion of the separation between home and public, an encroachment.
Many people of the day resented that.
I've never know a world without a telephone, but I knew one without a cellphone.
I miss being unreachable. The telephone was, ultimately, more good than harm. The cellphone (though perhaps not the smartphone) probably the same.
But I can absolutely understand how and why some people would have been resistant to it. I still know people without cellphones, I knew people without a phone of any kind not that long ago ("Write me a letter or come over. If it's not important enough to tell me in person, it can wait on the post")
Open ##4992457