Post #41,398
6/6/02 10:29:19 AM
|
Related to something I was just saying about OSS & FSF
You have now reduced The Company to a (now mapped) process.I believe, as I suspect do you, there are two classes of processes: those that are amenable to automation and those that are not. Increasing technology tends to move processes from the latter class to the former. Automated processes quickly face cost pressure, while pricing of non-automated processes depends on the willingness/ability of the people who can do them. Eg: Before the productrion line, very little was what we would now call "automated". Now, each new generation of automobile factories has greater mechanical automation and less human involvement. The same is true of computers. Each generation of software encapsulates and automates more functions that used to require human intervention. As recently as a few years ago, the ability to install Linux on arbitrary hardware was a premium service, for which consultants could charge premium prices. Now, programs/services like YaST and RedCarpet have automated the process, but the systems are proprietary. The next stage is the replacement of the proprietary automated systems with Free automated systems. Then will come standardization and commoditization. So it seems the progression is: - Human expert, custom work, expensive
- Human craftsman, standardized process, less expensive
- Proprietary mechanical (computerized) process, costs less than craftsmen per unit work (exception: improved consistency/product quality may enable premium price for product, thus making the process more valuable than craftsmen)
- Industry-standard (OSS) automated process, vendors compete on price
- Commoditization, price wars begin in ernest
Whoever is making money at a given stage of this process wants to prevent to onset of the next stage.
=== Microsoft offers them the one thing most business people will pay any price for - the ability to say "we had no choice - everyone's doing it that way." -- [link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=38978|Andrew Grygus]
|
Post #41,472
6/6/02 7:17:13 PM
|
Those seem to be the stages, but it's the Aim
which is ominous - eliminating humans wherever possible. And if the society signs off on this er meta-process, we may have to rethink a;; the ideas of the ilk, "a day's pay for a day's work; he who does not work does not eat; everyone Must have a job or be termed, 'slacker'" .. yada.
So far the argument for more automation has devolved to ~~ "oh, we're just taking over the jobs no one wants to do". Should the last 4 words start becoming fainter --
Then: time for a new social contract. (We can skip the Luddite phase if we're smarter than a post (?) OK So I give that: 50/50)
Ashton
|
Post #41,501
6/7/02 3:25:20 AM
|
Re: But,but, but
That argument has been with us since the steam engine.
There was a time when a 'road-gang' went out into the country to build roads & also to repair & where needed re-surface the tarred/concreted ones. Then came the steam engine & steam shovels & steam graders (later gasoline powered). Took over the work & did a way with what was really a low-paid menial task.
Did that mean these people lost out - perhaps, but their kids managed to obtain an education that allowed them to take on higher function jobs such as auto mechanics & engineers and designers and architects and tradesmen.
Also (I I remember these days) there was a time when we had clerks. Most streets I lived in as a kid had people whoose dads were clerks - filing clerks, booking clerks, ledger clerks, sales clerks, etc: etc: One of my very early jobs (aged 14) was as a ledger clerk in a company that kept county court judgements filed in hand written ledgers and the company would sell credit enquiries on people for two shillings a pop (20cents). A phone call from a registered customer would come in asking for a check on Joe Bloggs, when we weren't scanning the published weekly court records for ledger entries, we would look up the enquiries for the customers. For 5 shilling (50cents) we would provide a written report on the person. Years later (many) I was involved in setting up computer bereaus that did the same thing. So was I disadvantaged because the job of ledger clerk got automated - I hardly think so.
All that happens in reality is that menial tasks get automated (computers aren't smart as much as fast). Robots are good at simple repetitive tasks.
To take it all to seriously is to misunderstand the needs & forces driving change & also the human spirit that has always been looking for ways to elevate mankind to higher planes of existance & ability.
Sure we have lost complete generations of skilled lathe machinists due to the intro of the electronically programmable multi-tooled turret-head lathes of today (I loved working on the older lathes & milling machines - another past career). I have also heard many 'bitch' sessions about how we lost something precious when we lost the ability to operate slide-rules - replaced by Sharp calculators that did away with the detailed disciplined we learned in operating those rules. But evolution of mankind and the environment we create is as certain as what Darwin was able to explain in his theories for the origins of species.
But as mentioned elsewhere speculating doomsday scenarios based on what might happen is really only a characteristic pastime of some of us, and in that sense has a value in bringing to attention some paths that need to be trodden down carefully (such as cloning humans).
Cheers Doug
|
Post #41,503
6/7/02 3:39:37 AM
6/7/02 3:45:38 AM
|
Shall we sing "John Henry"? :-)
[link|http://www.ibiblio.org/jimmy/folkden/Jhenry.mp2|MP2] song.
Alex
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." -- Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
Edited by a6l6e6x
June 7, 2002, 03:45:38 AM EDT
|
Post #41,504
6/7/02 5:38:21 AM
|
Yes of course - you can't Not -invent stuff..
C'mon Doug - lumping a criticism of the trends away from democracy into.. something like Luddite behavior of the past, I deem a Red Herring. And please do not resurrect a rubric about change as if: Any change is tantamount to progress. Ergo any resistance to certain changes - must be [see Luddite]. We are adults here. (Sorry you missed the implications of your 'Corporate Schematic' in the larger comedy of ongoing homo-sap master plans :-\ufffd ) All that happens in reality is that menial tasks get automated (computers aren't smart as much as fast). Robots are good at simple repetitive tasks.
To take it all to seriously is to misunderstand the needs & forces driving change & also the human spirit that has always been looking for ways to elevate mankind to higher planes of existance & ability. Hah! So then - you see the effects thus far of a massive Corporatizing worldwide as ~~ changes in the direction of elevation of mankind ? Is that what you see, and believe is the direction? Very well, then - at least our differences are clear in that regard - I see nothing like that occurring (except perhaps among a very few, but their direction is not Corporate-inspired - quite orthogonal). You could examine the effect of the trends upon the chances for (growing numbers) to survive ouside of the agglomerating and homogenizing Corporate culture. The growing division into a mere 2-class society (here) works against any democratic social values. Corporate allegiance has little to do with geographic location or country of origin, or do you think otherwise? As 'education' morphs increasingly towards mere 'office job prep skills', we here are losing much more than just lore about "soon-to-be deceased steam locomotives". (Hey we're even missing *that* option too - much as we trashed our railroad systems. AmTrack today has had to go begging again, to the Congress.) You don't need refined diesel fuel to make use of the Carnot cycle: simply imagine a steam auto via modern techno, perhaps a hybrid concept - as, while the flash boiler is rapidly coming up to full performance. Not even on anyone's drawing board. And that's just one missing development re ongoing energy concerns. But you can make more money next quarter.. with the usual [oil] marketing - *that* is the corporate mindset always: short-term profits. Yours is different? What have I missed here? Sorry but - if it's your view that the present Corporate trend constitutes some sort of human progress: I'm missing it. As with the HMO (in US - you may have been spared That experience): Last year these were the most profitable Corporations of all - in a country where very expensive medicine is guaranteed via the insurance Corps and other traditional middle-men.. No national health plan yet, of course. YMMV in HK (?) Other rich countries have of course - faced those costs, and opted for a minimal guaranteed service for all. Our plan persists despite efforts to reform. (IMhO) - such efforts *would* be fiercely opposed / and are / present situation is simply vastly profitable for the many many middle-men between doctors and patients. Corporatization is occurring here in other areas once deemed a (local or higher) government responsibility: prisons for *profit*, for one. In CA (larger than most nations): prisons be #1 growth industry: ~ #s off top of head - in a given period 17 new prisons; one new school. Guards receive better pay than profs in small colleges. (Of course all these phenomena are interrelated with the Corporate effects. Nothing can be really isolated, except in textbooks - with lots of graphs.) Schools here may end up similarly; argument continues re the allowing of Tee Vee ads in schools: camel's nose is in that tent - but the natives are restless. Can't tell if restless enough. Anyway, my point isn't *just* about the planned obsolescence of humans within Corporations [as a side goal, that is] - but about the overall homogenizing of human activity into the tawdry aims of The Office. And in the end and personally, after all the usual Econ graphology - I see Corporatization as guaranteeing the most boring human era yet. Perhaps this phenom alone: could be the single largest contributor to worldwide creeping dumbth {??} We are seeing mega-Corps usurping governments, not just the US one. Whatever this might mean - it is not about any allegiance to societal concerns in any country of operations; it is about the wealth of the directing class. What Else is a Corporation formed to do? I infer that you like your Corp experience thus far (?) I OTOH shall continue to despise the effects I see all around me: a world looking more and more like a Colossal McDonalds, serviced by drones and serving up pabulum. (And a few very rich folks trying to keep the trend going. 'Course they do need a few lieutenants, and many are willing to make that trade-off.) I say that we are building a Hive - and it will be quite efficient, but it won't be made to accommodate most humans. So your quote above - is about diametrically opposite my observations locally, and my extrapolations from 'here'. Maybe you work for a quite different kind - hope so. Hey - maybe some of Yours could take over some of Ours! then ... .. Cheers, Ashton PS - if I need to add (?) since we are an elite band hereabouts: I'm not speaking for myself re the "techno changes" but re the vast majority of people who can't grok the simplest principles of how stuff works - increasingly. That gap won't get 'better' for an increasing % of the entire population, especially if education does not soon reverse course (in at least This country). But I do know how things work - in the end 'things' work via physics rules. People do not. Ordinary people have to live in some "here" also. And we may not require that they learn to compile Linux kernels next - to eat. (Dunno if daily spreadsheets are a 'better way' to spend time than say, shoveling cow manure? - but that's another thread) If we are going to morph towards a world wherein 'menial tasks' are given the connotation implicit in your 'history': that implies also that it shall continue to be acceptable that persons unable to grok techno - may be paid below base-level subsistence, and be left well out of contention for - participation in this so-called 'advancing consciousness'. Bad plan that, IMO. And I think that 'bad plan' IS the plan I see in progress. A.
|
Post #41,510
6/7/02 7:55:34 AM
|
Re: Yes of course - you can't Not -invent stuff.. YA GOT ME
(grin)
"you see the effects thus far of a massive Corporatizing worldwide as"
Where did I talk about or say anything like the above ??? - I thought I was talking about 'Evolution of the pieces' (appologies to Darwin :-)
Cheers Doug
|
Post #41,512
6/7/02 8:29:03 AM
|
Well, then you don't know what you're talking about.
The subject *was* the effect of *cultural* "evolution", where recent history -- technological progress since ~the beginning of the Industrial Revolution -- has had on the life of Joe Sixpack, "socio-economically" (to wit, to reduce him more and more to a mechanical cog, increasingly redundant).
Your apparent Panglossian happy-go-lucky stance, "it's just progress", is not warranted; you haven't presented the least shred of support that it is so...
No wonder, though, if you don't even KNOW that that's what you're saying!
Christian R. Conrad Of course, who am I to point fingers? I'm in the "Information Technology" business, prima facia evidence that there's bats in the bell tower. -- [link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=27764|Andrew Grygus]
|
Post #41,515
6/7/02 8:34:04 AM
|
Re: Jeeze CRC - that was mild ...
Haven't you got your self tanked up enough yet to include that characteristic f*** & s**** etc: etc: etc: etc: (ad nauseum)
Schnapps (or whatever) can be so eloquent ! (to some).
Cheers Doug :-)
PS is it summer or winter there now ?
|
Post #41,519
6/7/02 9:36:16 AM
|
Stone cold sober; at work. Summer.
Was going to write more, but... it *is* supposed to be *work*, after all. Hoped you'd be able to read all I wanted to say into it -- hoped in vain, it appears? OK, I'll try to get back to ya during the weekend.
No wonder; I see I missed whole words, in my hurry -- please read an "effect" into that Joe Sixpack sentence somewhere! :-)
Christian R. Conrad Of course, who am I to point fingers? I'm in the "Information Technology" business, prima facia evidence that there's bats in the bell tower. -- [link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=27764|Andrew Grygus]
|
Post #41,522
6/7/02 10:00:14 AM
|
Re: Please accept my public apology for
implying otherwise. I accept your word without quibble. I did realise it was summer - was being cheeky about what you guys get up to in winter.
I am concerned that an 'innocent' thread on an obvious technology issue & evolution (XML & Web Services) was being hijacked to thrash out personal grievances against corporations (which I would argue don't belong in this thread).
What I thought this was about was what XML and Web Services - what they actually and really mean & how these are likely to affect us in the careers we are in. Dragging outside issues into the thread and implying I am a corporate appologist is a distraction from a real world issue many of us are grappling with in regard to understanding the real impact of XML and Web Services, in a real world (the one that pays salaries & keeps us from starvation).
Next wed I am to address a variety of execs in our 'Corp' on just what XML & Web Services are & what impact they are likely to have on our business. I was asked to do this because for the past 18 months I have been warning various parts of the company that a 'significant' change was going to occur in what IT means to our business & the way we are likley to build & design software in the future. I don't see anything insidious in this. I am just gald they have listened & want to hear a professional perspective. What they choose to do with the info & about the concept is up their imaginations & courage.
Anyway,
I don't want to buy into issues to do with corporations. I am happy to let nature & evolution deal with them as will happen.
Cheers
Doug
|
Post #41,528
6/7/02 10:39:18 AM
|
Re: Carnot Cycle ... here is an example of a good one
Robert Stirling ...
[link|http://www.stirlingengine.com/faq/one?scope=public&faq_id=1|Stirling Engines]
"Q: Are Stirling engines really the most efficient engines possible?
A: In the mid 1800's a very bright Frenchman named Sadi Carnot figured out the maximum efficiency possible with any heat engine. It is a formula like this (Temperature of the hot side - Temperature of the cold side)/Temp of hot side x 100 equals the max theoretical efficiency. Of course the temperatures must be measured in degrees Kelvin or Rankine. Stirling engines (with perfect regeneration) match this cycle. Real Stirling engines can reach 50 percent of the maximum theoretical value. That is an incredibly high percentage! "
In the 1970s Ford built a Stirling engined motor car that was approx 30% more efficient on milage than a gasoline engine & unlike steam engines, would never explode like a bomb. But 30% was not enough to change from conventional engines.
"Here is a picture of a 1979 AMC Spirit. It was equipped with an experimental Stirling engine powerplant called the "P-40". The Spirit was capable of burning gasoline, diesel, or gasohol. The P-40 Stirling engine promised less pollution, 30% better mileage, and the same level of performance as the car's standard internal combustion engine. "
I have several models of these (accquired in the past 12 months from the US). They are fascinating conversation pieces.
Cheers
Doug
|
Post #41,599
6/7/02 6:35:04 PM
|
We had one on the roof!
at LBL. Then, a couple of years ago, I helped a friend (working at NASA - not a scientist) assemble some material on the topic. I haven't pursued enough to be entitled to an opinion re practicalities like... obscure alloy economics, tolerances - esp. tolerance of daily Joe Sixpack abuse of the "why do I Need to change the oil??' type.
Amazing though - presuming merely an honest 30% in the mentioned AMC test bed. But do you find it surprising that it wasn't enough to interest a (any) Corp in further pursuit?
As to your comment re the relevance of all this Other Stuff, to your IMO excellent XML analogy - guilty as charged. Still, the extrapolation fairly leaped to mind. (This mind). And I do realize that, in a meeting to relate present IT strategy to what seems to be coming down the pike:
One obviously can't subpoena the CIEIO to explain his parachute, or why it is that - the rate of Temp hiring has increased exponentially, and the temps are engaging in Gladiatorial combat during their two 8-minute coffee breaks per shift, and ...
Yes, we live in a Complete World\ufffd - only off or ex-work. This I have recognized. (And acted accordingly.)
:-\ufffd
Ashton Digressions R'Us LLC
What Does It All Mean, Alfie ??
|
Post #171,019
8/26/04 7:07:14 AM
|
Re: Carnot Cycle ... here is an example of a good one
Hi dmarker 2,
I'm very interested in these SMC spirits with the P-40 sterling engine. Do you have any further information on these engines or these cars?
look forward to hearing from you
Shimon
shimon@volvo340.com
posted by dmarker
"Robert Stirling ...
Stirling Engines [*]
"Q: Are Stirling engines really the most efficient engines possible?
A: In the mid 1800's a very bright Frenchman named Sadi Carnot figured out the maximum efficiency possible with any heat engine. It is a formula like this (Temperature of the hot side - Temperature of the cold side)/Temp of hot side x 100 equals the max theoretical efficiency. Of course the temperatures must be measured in degrees Kelvin or Rankine. Stirling engines (with perfect regeneration) match this cycle. Real Stirling engines can reach 50 percent of the maximum theoretical value. That is an incredibly high percentage! "
In the 1970s Ford built a Stirling engined motor car that was approx 30% more efficient on milage than a gasoline engine & unlike steam engines, would never explode like a bomb. But 30% was not enough to change from conventional engines.
"Here is a picture of a 1979 AMC Spirit. It was equipped with an experimental Stirling engine powerplant called the "P-40". The Spirit was capable of burning gasoline, diesel, or gasohol. The P-40 Stirling engine promised less pollution, 30% better mileage, and the same level of performance as the car's standard internal combustion engine. "
I have several models of these (accquired in the past 12 months from the US). They are fascinating conversation pieces.
Cheers
Doug"
shimon@volvo340.com
|
Post #41,678
6/8/02 8:58:42 PM
|
Hey Doug, Toolmakers, Machinists, lathes are STILL here
After all, my company has two machinists, four knee type vertical mills (real Bridgeports), a lathe, and other assorted manual machining equipment.
I'm sure employment is way down from the peak, but there's still substantial manual machining going on, mainly, I suspect, for prototyping.
For making a couple pieces, a manual machine is just as fast (CNC machines take time to setup, and CNC programmers aren't cheap either). However, for any reasonable volume, we farm our work out to machine shops, and they typically use CNC machines. And, of course, for small volumes, most other techniques (castings, powder forming, extrusion, etc) aren't even close to cost effective due to their high setup costs, and lack of precision.
Full size industrial-quality manual lathes and mills are still being sold by Bridgeport, Jet, and many more, although they're typically made in either Taiwan or China. A nice new Taiwanese one (with DRO and more) is around $8 - $10,000, whereas CNC's start at $40K.
Tony
|
Post #41,681
6/8/02 9:55:41 PM
6/8/02 9:57:54 PM
|
Re: A funny story re Lathes & precision finishing
I am sure there are still a lot of machine shops around, I suspect no where near what there was per capita in the 1940-50s (mostly war effort)
But one story I was told by a guy in california who made a hobby lathe years back, called the Taig Micro Lathe which was for the hobby market. I was fascinated with how he built these things - the small base (a flat bed) was made from a hollow aluminium extrusion & filled with a special concrete mix that gave them the needed rigitiy. But on to his story ...
He had formerly (in the early 1970s, run a machine shop producing precision components for the govt for use in missiles. The tolerances were incredibly tight & the polished finish was a critical part of the job. In his small machine shop he had a reputation for producing polshed surfaces that defied the statistics & the govt kept sending teams to look at why his shop was consistently better at the job that the larger and important volume producers.
He had one big lathe that was supposed to be used for the finishing off. It was specially approved by the govt for the job & he would not get contracts if he didn't have that required machine. But what he could never tell them was that he and his staff actually did the finishing off on an older unapproved (& never likely to be) lathe out the back & that their perfect finishes were achieved by using cigar ash as the finishing compound.
I really enjoy that story as a kind of 'John Henry' up yer nose at 'officialdom' when it comes to machinery. The fact that he never told the govt is a nice twist to the story.
Cheers - Doug Marker
Edited by dmarker2
June 8, 2002, 09:57:25 PM EDT
Edited by dmarker2
June 8, 2002, 09:57:54 PM EDT
|
Post #41,683
6/8/02 10:46:11 PM
|
I had a sort of opposite problem
In the Aircraft industry, landing gear hinge pins are considered to be rather critical parts (for some reason).
For a particular pin, I read the specification up and down and sideways and wrote a detailed manufacturing plan for inside manufacturing steps and exactly which outside vendors would be used for certain steps we were not equipped for.
Every time I had a batch ready to go, the Menasco source inspector tried to reject them because "they didn't look like the parts everyone else was making".
That's because ours were the only ones made to spec. Everyone else had to kiss grind after shot peen to hold tolerance. This is a very big no no. Shot peen needs to be the last step before hard chrome, because any touch of grinding negates the positive effects of the shot peen.
But my parts "looked different", so every time we had some to ship we had to call in his supervisor to buy them off.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #41,688
6/8/02 11:20:46 PM
6/9/02 12:03:11 AM
|
Re: I had a sort of opposite problem
That is interesting - 'They don't look right" so don't want em. Sheesh
Am interested as to what the 'shot peen' process involved. Am guessing that peen means 'hitting' & shot implies using ball bearings to do the hitting ? am also guessing that this was a hardening process after machining.
Cheers
Doug
UPDATE#1 LOOKED IT UP ON THE WEB ...
Shot Peen Forming [link|http://www.curtisswright.com/segments/metal_treatment/shot_peen_forming.asp|Shot Peen forming]
Peen forming is a dieless forming process performed at room temperature. During the process, the surface of the workpiece is impacted upon by small, round steel shot. Every piece of shot impacting the surface acts as a tiny peening hammer, producing elastic stretching of the upper surface and local plastic deformation that manifest itself as a residual compressive stress. The surface force of the residual compressive stress combined with the stretching causing the material to develop a compound, convex curvature on the peened side.
Parts formed by peen forming exhibit increased resistance to flexural bending fatigue. Another distinct advantage with peen forming, unlike most other forming methods, it that all surface stresses generated are of a compressive nature.
Edited by dmarker2
June 9, 2002, 12:03:11 AM EDT
|
Post #41,696
6/9/02 12:47:31 AM
6/9/02 12:58:20 AM
|
Only the last sentence is relative
Shot peening of (very hard and not at all formable) critical structural parts is done with very tiny steel shot at high velocity. The objective is to create those compressive stresses on the surface, similar to the stresses induced in tempered glass.
Grinding after shot peen tends to relieve these beneficial stresses through removal of material and heat, and introduces microscopic cracks and unwanted grinding stresses. Properly, there should be a heat cycle after grinding operations to remove the stresses produced by that process, but any such heat cycle would also remove the beneficial stresses from shot peening. On the other hand, shot peening can be used to relieve grinding stresses if a heat cycle is not possible due to metalergical (temper) requirements.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #41,710
6/9/02 3:33:29 AM
|
Taig is still around, but in Arizona
They are still making tabletop lathes and mills, at [link|http://www.taigtools.com/|Taig Tools] A CNC version is available at [link|http://www.microproto.com/|Micro Proto] for around $2,000.
[link|http://www.sherline.com/|Sherline] is probably the best known hobbyist lathe and mill company. Sherline does have some advantages, such as the availability of DROs and continuous speed motors. CNC conversions are available from other suppliers, and are, IIRC, over $2,000 for a complete system.
Similar (bigger but less precise) tools are available from China, e.g. Grizzly ( [link|http://www.aerocom.ws/bedair/Grizzly.html|here is one Grizzly web page] ), Harbor Freight, etc.
For dedicated CNC use, I'm most impressed with [link|http://www.maxnc.com/|Max NC], also in Arizona. Their models aren't much more than Taig or Sherline, but are available with servo motors, for example.
The manual table top mills seem to be roughly $500 - $1,000 (DRO is more), with CNC models at $2-3,000. A used full size manual mill would typically be $3-5,000, but has many problems for home use (3 phase power, often 480V, a weight of about 2,000 lbs, etc). I don't have any experience with these, but a friend who has used the Sherline says it's hard to do precision (meaning 0.001" or better) work with it, and that the real thing (Bridgeport) is much better.
Tony Who is slowly learning the Pro/Desktop free computer aided solid modeling program (and it's pretty good for a free program -- and no, I ain't going to become a ME -- but I might buy a table top mill or CNC machine)
|