I'm with you on this, Terry, generally.

The notion of 'economies of scale' seems to play out well every time. 
And there's no doubt that most people (yes, even including the engineers 
themselves) have no idea at all the degree to which certain advances in 
manufacturing - esp. big scale manufacturing - have improved things.

If we weren't doing things with big centralized systems (BCSs), I too am 
confident we'd be FAR worse off than we are.

But there are riders:

* politicians, which Terry alluded to, will screw things up; BCSs need 
to be politician-proof.

* BCSs tend to go hand-in-hand with rampant consumerism.  This need not 
be so, however, and we need to make this distinction more crisp.  BCSs 
are there to provide a supply for a known demand, NOT to stimulate an 
uncontrolled growth.

* we already do 'planned obsolescence'; we just have to apply it to the 
big centralized systems.

* a BCS can still be distributed (a system isn't quite the same as an 
"assembly").  I like to think of the Internet as a BCS even though its 
smeared out all over the world.  It's big (that's easy).  It's 
centralized in that it's just one thing, using relatively few parts, 
repeated generously as required, running VERY few basic protocols, 
providing fundamentally VERY few functions, and remember the internet is 
controlled by the 13 top level DNS servers.  13 computers that 
effectively run the Internet.

* ...and more I haven't thought of yet....

Cheers.
Fil

Terence Love wrote:
> Hi Karen,
> 
> Some of my most enjoyable design has been in growing cabbages! 
> 
> I feel you raise an important point.
> 
> You say, 
> 
> '..that's why I believe in a simple system. Its not hard to keep systems
> working strongly. You just need to get it easy for all to understand and
> work on it. Based on a simple tolerance to come up with a logical solution.
> If we want to clean the world, really all we need to do is to get people to
> think down and do the basics. Perhaps the hardest part is to get people
> convinced to think simple and just do it. pps: How can we get it going, when
> things get more complicated ?'
> 
> I wonder.
> 
> For severla decades I was really enthusiastic about self sufficiency, grass
> roots action for design and development for improving the environment,
> 'small is beautiful'  and low tech health services - to the point of
> designing lots of stuff, being involved in researching appropriate
> technologies, and mapping out  in detail the elements needed for sucessfully
> self-sustainable eco-villages.
> 
> I remember the shock at suddenly realising  the massive advantages of large
> centralised systems and how they did things much better. 
> 
> At the same time, I began to see the enormous benefits , _thousands_ of
> time more than previously I had been able to conceive, of the underlying
> foundations of the outcomes of engineering design in manufacturing and
> production. This was truly a shock as I'd moved out of engineering design
> because of believing it was responsible for environmental mess and that we
> could do better  'naturally' with local small scale systems.
> 
> Part of the shock was realising the most environmentally friendly place to
> be is in a city (with its efficient centralised systems and low
> environmental impact per person) - rather than the country (with its huge
> adverse environmental impacts per person).  Another was realising  craft and
> art is made affordable because we have these tremendously efficient
> technical infrastructures. Like realising the experience of using an  iPod
> (or going sailing, or listening to Harry Manx's music or...) is  due mostly
> to how we design great efficient engineered systems.
> 
> Some of  these ideas are at the moment romantically unfashionable.
> 
> You say, 'perhaps the hardest part is to get people convinced to think
> simple and just do it'.  
> 
> The reality seems to show that this 'thinking simple and just doing it'
> requires changing the design focus away from the local back yard and to to
> the massively larger scale. For me the question is how to refocus the
> enthusiasm for improving the world onto improving and using big national
> centralised systems - and do this while there is such a strong emotive and
> romantic public promotion and unconsidered reification of the 'small' and
> 'local'.
> 
> The cynic in me wonders about the political. If  people can be  encouraged
> to keep their design energy and focus  on improving  their immediate
> environment (which absorbs a huge amount of personal time, cash and energy),
> then they will become quite a servile populace.
> 
> I suggest a truly design aware community would be looking at how to design
> to use more and better big centralised systems.
> 
> But make sure also not to design them to last!
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Terry

-- 
Filippo A. Salustri, Ph.D., P.Eng.
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering
Ryerson University
350 Victoria St, Toronto, ON, M5B 2K3, Canada
Tel: 416/979-5000 ext 7749
Fax: 416/979-5265
Email: [log in to unmask]
http://deseng.ryerson.ca/~fil/