h a l f b a k e r yI CAN HAZ CROISSANTZ?
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
"An escalator can never break. It can only
become stairs. You would never see an
'Escalator Temporarily Out Of Order' sign,
just 'Escalator Temporarily Stairs. Sorry for
the convenience.'"-Mitch Hedberg
There are simple examples of what might
be called "wear-evolving tools"
everywhere.
A lot of the tools one
encounters in the world amount to
combinations of other tools. As use takes
its toll on a tool, the underlying tools
which compose the original emerge.
However, the simple tools that emerge can
rarely compete with equivalent, new tools
designed from the start with a specific
purpose. A broken-down car might be
considered, at best, a piece of furniture.
At the very least it is an ungainly
paperweight. Mitch Hedberg's escalator-
to-staircase idea is perhaps one of the
most elegant examples.
What if designers accounted for the wear
of a tool in its initial design, so that as it
became ineffective when used for its
original purpose, it became more valuable
as some other kind of tool? Often, for
safety reasons, they do. The autogyro, for
instance, is a powered helicopter-like
craft. Should its engine fail, it becomes a
maneuverable glider.
I think that the effect of use and the effect
of the environment on most objects can be
fairly accurately predicted. I have a hunch
that if enough effort were put into the
design of something, it would be possible
to manufacture things which, instead of
becoming totally useless with age, simply
become something different.
Imagine engines with only a few "high-
level" parts. As these parts wear, they can
be used to replace smaller parts in the
same engine. The engine could be run
indefinitely as long as the highest-level
components are replaced as they are worn
and shift function.
The Practice Effect
http://www.sfreview...actice%20Effect.htm A completely unrelated story that the name of this idea brought to mind. I liked the book somewhat more than the reviewer. [ato_de, May 22 2005]
[link]
|
|
Post functional utility is in the eye of the beholder. |
|
|
Or the genius who can turn a broken TV into a fly zapper. |
|
|
I dropped my towel in the hottub last night, and scolded myself for ruining the towel. Moments later, my neck was aching, and I used the towel as cushion on the edge of the tub. It evolved. |
|
|
A wet towel is still a good hot tub cushion. |
|
|
This is, I still believe, only applicable as a paradigm, but it's a great fucking paradigm. |
|
|
Everything [daseva] said. It would be lovely to think that designers could plan a product's lifetime to this level of detail, but in reality users find first uses for products that the designers never imagined, let alone second uses. |
|
|
It's a great concept, though. A deeply philosophical bun. |
|
|
This is similar to Albert Speer's Theory of Ruin Value. |
|
|
Hmmm. I think most power-tools have
only the potental of evolving into
extremely clunky versions of their
mechanical counterparts. |
|
|
Most electronics, however, evolve into
the same thing (with varying degrees of
success): a doorstop. |
|
|
I think that the compromises required to make major components wear into minor components would make them less efficient at their initial job. |
|
|
a metaphor for the aging process of humans, need one say more? |
|
|
well this is the h'bakery, so it goes without saying that ones need say more, regardless of saying whether it goes without saying or say, saying nothing at all. |
|
|
My kitchen sink has evolved into a metronome. |
|
|
My cooker has evolved into an anolgue synth, with the rear-left hob control evolving into the emphasis control. |
|
|
My loud hard-drive has evolved into a pitch-reference guitar tuner with a one-note range. |
|
|
I'd like to see a geodesic dome composed entirely of used cars. |
|
|
Good idea, [wooby]. Why not create nanobots that can be programmed to form virtually any tool? Then when one wears down, you just get out the remote controlled nano programmer device, and tell them to reorganize themselves into something else. |
|
| |