NuncErgoFacite

NuncErgoFacite t1_j1wawi1 wrote

I understand that you are determined to be "right" at the expense of someone else. I also understand that you are mis-applying Capitalism as economic theory to a tangential discussion of economic pressure on a industry. I just wonder who it was that hurt you so and hope that you up your fluoxetine dosage soon. Happy Holidays.

−1

NuncErgoFacite t1_j1tmj6o wrote

I want to like your comment, but I really can't imagine using the word Capitolism without pendanticly rambling about communism.

Capitalism uses/allows supply and demand to create economic pressure upon innovation.

Electric cars were not affordable to manufacture until 15 years ago, despite having had the technical capability since the 1920's (though the energy storage debate would likely push that back to the 70's). It is only in our current economic situation that we find the financial incentive to form companies that build mass production facilities capable of supplying that product to the masses. Twenty years ago, that would not be possible on a purely financial basis. Now, loads of RnD are being pushed into energy storage and kinetic energy recapture. This impulse, in turn, is creating a whole new class of electronics based on batteries - from houses to cell phones.

But sure. None of that makes sense.

−1

NuncErgoFacite t1_j1ph655 wrote

Technology, historically speaking, is the result of necessity driving innovation, not innovation driving need. Capitalism creates an artificial or auto-necessity by using economic pressure on discovery/research and development. But if humanity were facing a global food shortage, real-necessity would kick in and we would find a way - or not and starve until the population shrinks far enough to be sustainable by whatever means survive. History has both versions of that exact example.

As for pure scientific discovery - I believe history and James Burke will back me up when I say that if humanity can see a thing/process that we need being done anywhere, even in the most inefficient and cost exorbitant fashion, then we have/will refine the process until it becomes common place.

48