Comment by taeric | Hacker News Reader

Comment by taeric | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

This is almost certainly a nice story we tell ourselves about a mythical past that just didn't exist.

It can be annoying to say, but modern factory produced things are in an absurdly higher quality spectrum than most of what proceeded them. This is absolutely no different from when machined parts for things first got started. We still have some odd reverence for "hand crafted" things when we know that computer aided design and manufactured are flat out better. In every way.

As for ownership, I hate to break it to you, but it is very likely that a good many of the master works we ascribe to people were heavily executed by assistants. Not that this is too bad, but would be akin to thinking that Miyazaki did all of the art for the movies. We likely have no idea who did a lot of the work we ascribe to single artists throughout history.

On to the rest of the points, even the ones I somewhat resonate with are just flat out misguided. People were ALWAYS resources. Well before the modern world.

Computer and machine manufactured parts can be better, but it's a mistake to believe they always are. Take two contrasting examples.

In guitar manufacturing, CNC machines were a revolution. The quality of mid-range guitars improved massively, until there was little difference between them and the premium ones.

In furniture, modern manufacturing techniques drastically worsened the quality of everything. MDF and veneers are inherently worse than hand-crafted wood. The revolution here was making it cheaper.

CNC and other machining techniques raise the high bar for what's possible, and they have the potential to lower costs. That's it. They don't inherently improve quality, that's a factor of market forces.

Comparing a cheap thing to an expensive thing is absurd.

The appropriate comparison is which is better for the same price

If the cheap thing replaces the expensive thing and there is no same-price comparison, is it absurd? My point is that many products that were handmade at high quality no longer exist because of modern manufacturing. If you want a chair or, say, a set of silverware at the same inflation-adjusted price it would have been available for seventy years ago, you can't get it because the market sector has shifted so thoroughly to cheaper, worse products (enabled by modern manufacturing) that similar quality is only available through specialty stores at a much higher price. This happens even if the specialty stores are using computer-aided techniques and not handcrafting, because of the change in economics of scale.

The catch here is that most people did not have high quality hand made furniture. Most people had low quality hand made things. Pretty much forever. And is why they aren't here for you to see them.

I would wager that the general change in availability of wood is by far the biggest driver in difference for the markets you are describing?

Particularly, furniture benefits greatly from hard wood. At least, the furniture that is old that you are likely to see. It also benefits heavily from being preserved, not used.

> MDF and veneers are inherently worse than hand-crafted wood.

Generally incorrect, but it depends. Wear can cause mdf/veneer to have "bad optics" compared to solid wood, but mdf/veneer can have more suitable physical properties and enables more consistent visual quality and design possibilities.

I suppose it depends on your definition of worse. It is more versatile. It's also toxic and fragile, and far more likely to break in ways that are hard to repair. I can only think of one object I own where the physical properties of particle board or MDF are a positive: a subwoofer where its consistency helps with acoustics.

It helps with all types of speakers, not just subwoofers. For the same reasons, it can work as structural parts of furniture.

Modern process controls allow us to hit intended outcomes consistently at lower costs. But that doesn't mean the intended outcomes are always better that what you would aim for with less capability.

There are real customers that want cost reductions that lead to reduced lifetimes, because they have no intention of using the thing they are buying for decades. It isn't just manufacturers looking to make money through planned obsolescence.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com