Hobartlemagne 

It all depends on what evolved to be standard sizes and parts compatibility. Some 80's bikes still meet modern parts fitting standards.

discosaurus

With a little creativity and persistence--and I do mean a little, it truly doesn't take much--parts can be found for anything. Updating my early 70's Raleigh with a new wheelset and drivetrain only required two NOS purchases off eBay (bottom bracket and cable housing stops). Not only is it an old bike, but it's lower end and a Raleigh, so it uses a lot of nonstandard parts and sizes. I can't imagine having that many problems finding parts for newer, better, more common bikes.

Artkansas 

And surprisingly, the car industry may be one of the better industries as far as being able to maintain something and recycle it. Hot rodders got it started, but you can buy parts interchangeability manuals from Ford, GM etc. A window crank from an Impala will fit a Nova.

Wouldn't it be nice if bicycle manufacturers would do the same? If as bicyclists, we demand it, it will be provided. It's also possible that some individuals should come forward and provide a bicycle aftermarket parts. This is starting to happen, but it could go much bigger.

Hobartlemagne 

The schraeder valve was invented in 1891, and still used on car tires today.

Artkansas 

Some consumers care, some don't. I used to buy American tools. I don't anymore. I can't find them for the most part. It's a choice that's been taken out of my hands.

The video was interesting, but the guilt-tripping was so strong that after 6 minutes I stopped it. I compare that to the videos of "Cadillac Desert" that explore just as outrageous a subject, but with enough humor to leaven it. I'll try to watch the rest later.

bmclaughlin807

If you have an old computer that you can use, I'd recommend trying Ubuntu linux... or if you don't, I believe they have a 'live CD' version you can download that is bootable and will give you a good feeling for it.

Ubuntu is very user friendly, and has a very easy to use software repository system that will easily cover all basic computer uses... including a decent selection of productivity software and games.

The biggest shortcoming that I personally find in Linux is support for new hardware (recently released stuff) and wireless adapters.

mrbubbles

Daimler was the one who came up with the idea that if some parts can be used in several models of vehicle, it cuts down production cost dramatically, and also if the part can be recycled from older model and be used in the new ones, even better. Makes you think twice about the cars people are buying, they are not necessarily new.

wahoonc

What type of tools? I may have a couple of sources for you. One that I buy my hand mechanic type tools from is Armstrong Tools part of the Dahner Group, and IIRC Crescent and Channel Lock are still US made, and of course Park Tools for the bicycle.

Aaron

bragi

Go ahead and say it: C-H-I-N-A. It's not right to be too disapproving, though. We (North Americans) still have a huge individual resource-use footprint compared to the average person in that supposedly evil country. Before we wail too loudly at the Chinese for driving up the price of resources we thought were exclusively our own, we need to peek in a mirror.

discosaurus

+1

China and India are following the example we set. And now we are blaming them for supposedly starting the problem(s).

Newspaperguy

A friend of mine, in the auto parts industry, tells me some parts were once standard sizes many years ago. The same part would fit numerous makes and models. Today, car makers each use their own sizes. Some have different sizes for each model and year. This means the part that would fit a 2001 model might not fit the same vehicle built in 2005.

wahoonc

People are hopefully supposed to learn from other's mistakes...I know I do, but I guess that doesn't work when greed is involved. And history does have a way of repeating itself.


Aaron

Newspaperguy

But how can we expect anyone else not to follow our example when we've spent years promoting it as the ideal? Why should we be surprised if people in other countries want the lifestyle we've touted to the rest of the world?

This reminds me of a few years ago, when North Americans were condemning Brazil for cutting down rainforests to provide grazing land for cattle. But in the 1700s and 1800s, the U.S. and Canada had already cut vast tracts of forest land for similar purposes. Why was it okay for us but not okay for Brazil?

The only way we can hope to be taken seriously in China and India today is if we truly make an effort to change our ways — to repent. It's not enough to talk about the potential problems, no matter how well we know the facts and arguments. We need to put our talk into action. And this action must come from more than just a dedicated minority.

JeffS

I have no interest in starting a micro$oft/linux war, but have you compared the install requirements of a standard linux (say RedHat/Ubuntu) install compared to say... ten years ago? (comparing Vista/Win98 eras).

It's not exactly the lightweight OS that it used to be.

--------

Yes, the market it pushing things, but it's just as much about consumerism. Think about the new computer you bought ten years ago, how fast you thought it was, and the applications you were running on it. Now compare that to what you're doing with it today. I'd bet that not a whole hell of a lot has changed. Your emails still comes in, you still browse the internet, and even if you are using a higher-end graphics/cad/etc package, you're not getting any more work done that you were then (unless you're one of the top 1% of users).

Yea, screw M$ for changing the word format twice in that period... and screw web developers for using technologies that won't work in older browsers - but it's not the fault of any one group.

If I were going to blame anything though, it would be the ever-declining skill of the software developers. My current employer recently released a new version of their software. It has fewer features than the old one, and requires considerably more memory and processor, as well as forcing a database upgrade. To give you an idea, we regularly saw memory consumption in the 500-800MB range during the release copy stage.

So now, every new customer either has to already have new computers, or they have to go buy new ones to run the app.

JeffS

Greed is right. We've laid out a roadmap for anyone with enough money and influence to follow. It's hardly been a mistake from the corporate point of view.

The sad part about China is that the government seems to have sold out faster, and more completely than the US government did. I can't imagine what the world will be like when China is the primary (only?) superpower (I'm assuming the oil will last long enough for that to happen).

bmclaughlin807

Redhat (It's Fedora, now, actually...) and Ubuntu will both run quite acceptably on a 4 or 5 year old computer... or even older! Try that with Vista. Vista won't run acceptably on a NEW computer that meets the minimum requirements.

I ran Fedora on 1.8 Ghz celeron computer a friend of mine pulled out of a dumpster... ran quite acceptably till I gave it away.

Roody

I couldn't watch the video because the 10 year old computer I'm using doesn't do a good job with videos, even though there's a broadband connection. (That's an example of advancing technology, as others have pointed out.) But I think I've had a lot of similar thoughts on my own.

I used to have a backpack that worked well for 3 years. It was still functioning, but starting to look shabby, so I replaced it in August. The new pack was the same brand and model name, and cost a couple dollars less. It also had a lot of fancy straps, hooks and pockets that the old one lacked. Pretty cool, I thought at the time. But, as I'm sure most of you can guess, the plastic zipper broke less than 5 months after purchase, rendering it useless. That's planned obsolescence in two ways. First throw on a bunch of extra bells and whistles so gullible consumers (like me) will think they have to buy the "new" model. Then make it shoddy so it has to be replaced right away.

The economy has to "grow" at least three per cent a year or everybody gets cranky. Obsolescence keeps people buying crap they don't need--preferably on credit--to keep the machine turning. The politicians say it's our patriotic duty to spend more as consumers. We did it after 9/11, but we're currently starting to fall short on patriotic purchases. So of course Washington is printing up rebate checks right now to get us back on track with our spending, God bless 'em.

littlefoot

+1 on the 'Rolls Razor' I have my granfathers he purchased while stationed in England before the Normandy invasion, use it often and it's traveled the world with me.

heywood

I had a real problem with this video..it started with the 'tank' to represent government, although she decided to use a 'people'.... okay that was way too political from the get go. Then starting off talking about raping the land and killing the animals..okay i had to turn it off at that point. Unfortunatly it was propaganda and not science or economics..i was dissapointed because there are some really important questions to be asked about our consumer society..I'm afraid allot of these people (well fed individuals, products of late 20th century, well to do societies) don't realize how huge the earth is, or the truly frightening forces of nature. They seem to have a guilt ridden view of humanity that makes us so powerful that we are destroyers of worlds, and like their 18th century Victorian counterparts we must be wise stewards of the planet and deny ourselves for the betterment of Gods creation...errr..well no. It'd take a new virus, asteroid or a couple of (around 6) volcanoes to go off and that would be the end of us.

I don't believe in waste but I do believe in people and science, maybe a little balance is in order.

Sorry to ramble but the first six minutes of that video really..really annoyed me I wanted to yell "go back to the Hamptons or Caltech and make protest posters with the rest of your 'concerned' friends and don't push your 'views' on me..read a technical book for God's sake!"

Sorry..

Finally.. if someone was teaching this to my kid, I'd be definatly having a talk to the schools principle about politics over education.

bragi

Yes, the tone of the lady in the video is pretty annoying, but that doesn't take away the truth of her message, and what a clear, concise message it is (too many people consuming too much with too little regard for the consequences). I do teach this to kids, and dammit, it's not political. It's the reality on the ground. I'm old enough to remember $1.00/gal gas. The population of my home state has quadrupled since I was in high school, and the landscape has gone to **** before my eyes. And this is happening even more rapidly in other parts of the world. We have 6 billion people on Earth, and counting, most of whom would love to have a standard of living equal to that of the West, and who can blame them, but with these numbers it's never gonna happen. Get your head out of the sand. Do you really think that the math will change just because it doesn't agree with your political views?

JeffS

Sorry, but people like you, and the idea that you can fight propaganda with science are part of the reason we're in this mess.

Most people, for some reason, think scientists have some hidden agenda to everything, so they're skeptical from the start. What's more is that they can't understand the science if it's presented to them.

How many times have we seen people in this forum say the equivalent of "I'm not going to keep driving until you prove to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that it's hurting the environment". Sorry, but if someone won't/can't concede the obvious, you're not going to turn them around with an analysis of auto emissions on the Brazilian rainforest.

I'm not saying that this wasn't fluff, because it was. If this fluff were to appear on television (oh the irony) it would go as far or further towards changing behavior than anything else.

The corporations have been doing this for years. That's why evolution, global warming, dying oceans, etc are all just "theories" to so many people.

Roody

It's hard to know where to aim the message.

Like you imply, scientific arguments don't work in a country where most people think that greedy scientists, mad for grant money, are the masterminds of a vast conspiracy to fool and fleece the public. A plot that, praise God, is valiantly fought against by the honest and selfless tele-evangelists and right wing AM radio prophets.

Theological arguments aren't much more effective when 96 % of the people call themselves Christians, yet half those self-described Christians believe in the literal truth of the Jewish Bible, while simultaneously believing in pagan astrology and Hindu reincarnation (according to a couple recent polls). I really don't think cafeteria style fundamentalism is conducive to reason and analysis.

spinninwheels

What questions would you ask?

I think you may be missing the point that she was trying to make about finite resources. Granted her style and approach may have been annoying and irratating, and that could possible just turn people off to the message.

Do you not think, it would be in our best interests to be diligent stewards with respect to our environment?

So in the meantime it's business as usual?

How is it that you believe in people? Please elaborate because I really don't know what you're getting at?

And you believe in science? Do you suscribe to any of the projected time frames put forth from peak oil? Do you believe in peak oil?

It's alarming how much of our life and economy is tied to oil. This is a finite resource. Well, actually I guess not. One only has to wait a few million years for the carbon to come full circle again.

This is the point that I felt she was trying to get across.

I would be interested to hear what you think we should be telling the 6 billion plus people, with respect to consumption and resources. And furthermore, what measures should we take to ensure there is something left for future generations? Or is this inconsequential in the scheme of things?

JusticeZero

Sure, but it isn't PLANNED obsolescence. You don't HAVE to toss out the computers, you just WANT to. Lots of people still use computers made fifteen years ago and do fine, they are still supported in many ways, they're durable and made to last, and as long as you don't want to use flashy stuff that requires capabilities that were not physically possible and were ten times the "theoretical limit" of what a computer could do when the computer was built with the absolute newest technology of the time you're fine.
PLANNED obsolescence is when you make your products shoddy pieces of crap because when they break down, you'll be releasing a new flashy model with a stylish paint job and cool bells and whistles that otherwise functions pretty much the same and works at a similar standard to the existing old stuff.

JusticeZero

They do. I've been using Ubuntu exclusively for over a year. the native games are mostly garbage, but it runs great. Xubuntu (the low resources version) apparently runs on systems down to 64MB of memory, though 128MB is recommended. It's a free download and you can play with it on the CD. It seems confusing for a bit but it's not any more confusing than Windows; think of it as the difference between riding a USS bent and a DF roadie. If you learned the USS as a child, the DF is going to be a pain to figure out.