RainLover wrote:katiesBoyfriend wrote:If anything goes wrong with a machine, there's usually a reason why, such as improper operation or component failure. Often, the error can be corrected or the damage repaired, and, if not, the machine is usually replaceable either with an exact copy or something equivalent.
That misses my point.
Hardly that. You're assuming that machines have the same attributes and capabilities as sentient beings. A machine is simply a collection of various materials, such as metals and minerals, which were arranged into certain combinations and given specific geometries and shapes. By itself, a machine is incapable of doing anything until it receives some form of instruction.
katiesBoyfriend wrote:Human beings are known to do things which completely defy all logic, reason, and rationality. Sometimes that is due to error, arising from circumstances such as fatigue or illness. However, often they will do things simply out of self-interest or outright malice, making a deliberate decision to do so, even when there is a clear choice to select another course of action. Show me a machine or an animal that does that.
Microsoft Windows. Vicious dogs. You're still missing my point.
Microsoft Windows is an elaborate set of instructions by which certain computational machines are expected to operate. It's hardly the fault of the machine for any poor or improper performance.
Vicious dogs do not happen at random. They become vicious because they were trained to do so or have an illness or physical infirmity which would prompt such actions. They did not choose to become nasty. Many humans, however, do and usually for reasons of self-interest.
Ignoring the effect of human emotions, motivations, bad design, and (even under the best conditions, unintended consequences) in any engineered device is pure folly, and the world runs on all of that.
Random failures can occur. That why there are statistical models that not only describe the frequency by which they occur through time, they are accounted for in the design of such devices. Making devices to operate perfectly under all conditions is not only impossible, but would be enormously expensive if it was possible.
That's why there's a secondary market for repair or replacement of everything.
Not everything. Many devices are simply discarded when they fail because repair or replacement of individual components would be too expensive. Nowadays, many electronic products use surface mount technology. They use very few discrete components, if any. When an SMT board fails, almost always it's tossed out because there isn't much on them that can be fixed. Even if it's possible to repair them, it's quite tricky to do and may require special equipment.
Even a mercury switch requires reliable components, good manufacturing practices, proper installation and user setting to work correctly.
As does any device.
I've had to replace too many thermostats in my day to fall for hardware-based arguments, but again, real dangers lie in all devices, programmable or mechanical, but programmable devices are by far the worst with computer makers of both hardware and software being the worse of the worst. Want to argue that something as simple as a switch can't be a deadly weapon? Talk to people who stepped off a landmine. Or were killed from driving a recalled GM car with a defective ignition switch. Oh that's right, you can't. THEY'RE DEAD.
Forensic engineering is a discipline that is concerned not just with what happened in a mishap but, possibly, where the liability lies. Often, the failure of a single component in a system may not have been hazardous by itself, particularly if it had been identified sufficiently early. However, operating that system with that failed component could be hazardous if the failure had occurred in a critical subsystem.
Who ultimately takes responsibility for the consequences is often determined by the courts. It is such issues that forms the basis for a great deal of tort litigation.
Computer makers and programmers have been lying to customers, the media, and themselves for generations, from the glowing hype about what something's supposed to do, to planned obsolescence.
Not all obsolescence is planned. Machines evolve to not only make use of developments in technology but also to meet user requirements. Obsolescence doesn't necessarily mean that anything has to be discarded as useless. It simply means that the systems in questions cannot be upgraded any further or replacements become more difficult to obtain. They are usually perfectly functional at that point. For example, a lot of good amateur radio equipment makes use of vacuum tubes and it works perfectly.
Sometimes, certain claims are made out of foolish optimism and the devices which were so portrayed often fall short of the expectations that resulted. That is hardly what one would call a lie. That's not to say that there hasn't been fraud and some advertisements are, frankly, outright lies.
Even open source software is routinely used against the people who install it, or has bugs or limitations even within the scope of its intended operation.
That's why it's open-source. It's usually cobbled together by amateurs and things sometimes don't work the way programmers think they should. Periodically, software patches or even completely new versions are released and it's up to the users to have them installed.
It's an adversarial relationship which we have with machines,
I don't have one. If I have a machine which performs below my expectations, and I'm sufficiently inconvenienced by it, I either repair or replace it.
an uneasy peace in the best of times, and subverting our efforts and spying on us the rest of the time,
I hardly consider any machines or devices that I own and/or use are engaging in a conspiracy against me. I might think they do at times, though.
built for profit, not altruism,
It's called economics. People create products and render services for reward, often financial gain.
with their useful lives calculated to barely outlast their warranties.
There's an advantage to that. Spare parts are available during the term in which the warranty is valid.
Arguing against that position is indefensible.
By that logic, I gleefully plead guilty as charged.
If you do so, everyone reading this thread will know you're on the wrong side of this equation. So go ahead, out yourself.
I merely stated established, verifiable facts.
This doesn't mean I wouldn't have sex with a robot, but you can be damn sure I'd inspect it very carefully and know everything I could about its operation before I'd let it touch me intimately.
With any new product or service, I prefer to wait until the bugs have been worked out.
"A man has to be what he is, Joey. Can't break the mould. I tried it and it didn't work for me." Alan Ladd, Shane
"The two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity." Harlan Ellison
"Dad says that anyone who can't use a slide rule is a cultural illiterate and should not be allowed to vote. Mine is a beauty--a K&E 20-inch Log-log Duplex Decitrig." Robert Heinlein
) My hope, though, is that through technology we solve many more problems than we create, if we stay true to our conscience.
I'm reminded of what comedian Henny Youngman apparently used to say at the end of his routine: "Is there anybody here I haven't offended yet?"
