Is technological regression a thing?

[hbelkins]

In general, technological regression is not necessarily a bad thing. My dad absolutely refused to buy a vehicle with power windows. His reasoning was that if something happens and the electrical system goes bad, the battery dies, a motor fails, or something similar, you're stuck with not being able to roll your window down or up. The last new vehicle he bought was a 1998 Chevy pickup. Manual windows were not available. He was not happy about that at all.

Not sure that is true about manual/crank windows not available after 1998...

I have driven a 2008 Ford F150, 2016 Chevy Work Van, and 2014 Chevy 3500, and all had manual/crank windows. All were work vehicles, but they came from the Factory that way. GM and Ford will make them, if you want them

It wasn't an option on this particular truck. My dad ordered it from the factory.

[empirestate]

In general, technological regression is not necessarily a bad thing. My dad absolutely refused to buy a vehicle with power windows. His reasoning was that if something happens and the electrical system goes bad, the battery dies, a motor fails, or something similar, you're stuck with not being able to roll your window down or up. The last new vehicle he bought was a 1998 Chevy pickup. Manual windows were not available. He was not happy about that at all.

We become too dependent on technology.

In your example, though, technological regression would indeed be a bad thing. The regression in this case is replacing an existing technology–manual windows–with a newer one–automatic windows–that solves the same problem, but solves it less well than the older system did. So your dad would consider the regression from manual to automatic windows to be a bad thing.

If you are looking for a single big answer, it isn't going to be found. What you are going to find is plenty of small incremental reasons.

Precisely. A single answer, yes, but not a big one. The phenomenon happens on a small scale, solving small problems: the opening of a window, the switching of a call, the recording of a musical tone.

But, just to make one thing clear: it's not reasons I'm looking for. I haven't the slightest doubt that simple economics is the reason for most of it, if not all. I'm just looking for the existence of the phenomenon to begin with. (And I'm no longer looking, for that matter–in fact, maybe I never was! Maybe my question is really just, "There's this thing called technological regression; have you noticed it too?") 

[abefroman329]

I think this might also be an example of what you're looking for:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_eye/2015/06/25/air_france_flight_447_and_the_safety_paradox_of_airline_automation_on_99.html

[kalvado]

Now if you think that it is a slow ongoing process, I really disagree with you.

I don't think that it is, no. (And I don't think that it's not.) For some reason, you seem to be arguing a number of points that aren't part of my question.

Just lets define your question a bit tighter. Do you think Elmer is a slow on-going process or a harsh catastrophic event we're witnessing in development?

Can you call it regress? I don't think so[...]

That's another one. If you can't call it regress, no problem. Like I said, we can just call it Elmer, in which case my question simply becomes "is Elmer a thing?"

Now, it so happens that Elmer is, indeed, a thing–and it actually is called regress (or regression). Whether that's an apt name is outside the scope of my question, but it's worth knowing that it is, in fact, the name that many observers use.

And again lets define Elmer carefully. You seem to lump up a few different things under the same umbrella...

[kalvado]

In general, technological regression is not necessarily a bad thing. My dad absolutely refused to buy a vehicle with power windows. His reasoning was that if something happens and the electrical system goes bad, the battery dies, a motor fails, or something similar, you're stuck with not being able to roll your window down or up. The last new vehicle he bought was a 1998 Chevy pickup. Manual windows were not available. He was not happy about that at all.

We become too dependent on technology.

In your example, though, technological regression would indeed be a bad thing. The regression in this case is replacing an existing technology–manual windows–with a newer one–automatic windows–that solves the same problem, but solves it less well than the older system did. So your dad would consider the regression from manual to automatic windows to be a bad thing.

You cannot do an improvement such that everyone would be happy with. It is impossible to do a good thing without hurting someone...

[J N Winkler]

But, just to make one thing clear: it's not reasons I'm looking for. I haven't the slightest doubt that simple economics is the reason for most of it, if not all. I'm just looking for the existence of the phenomenon to begin with. (And I'm no longer looking, for that matter–in fact, maybe I never was! Maybe my question is really just, "There's this thing called technological regression; have you noticed it too?")

The phenomenon (as described in this thread) exists, but I am not sure technological regression is the most apposite term or the one that is favored by historians of technology.  Most of the examples of it that have been cited in this thread (Roman roads, phone call switching, etc.) are cases of an existing technology being withdrawn from active use while the underlying know-how is not lost and remains available in books, patents, engineering drawings, prototypes, etc.  There is a related but distinct phenomenon where the know-how is actually lost, which can happen in a variety of ways:  records are not archived and are instead lost or destroyed; people who have the know-how die before they can write it down or pass it on to others; existing prototypes of an implementation are dismantled, lost, or destroyed; etc.

From the viewpoint of an economist or a historian of technology, it is advantageous to differentiate between cases where technology is abandoned or de-emphasized for economic reasons, and cases where the underlying know-how is lost.  In the former case, the technological frontier of production possibility for a given society remains the same.  In the latter, it shrinks.

[J N Winkler]

You cannot do an improvement such that everyone would be happy with. It is impossible to do a good thing without hurting someone...

Improvement that benefits at least one person while leaving no-one worse off = Pareto gain.

Improvement that benefits at least one person while leaving others worse off in such a way that the winner(s) experience a net gain after compensating the loser(s) = Kaldor-Hicks gain.

The former is, of course, much rarer than the latter, and in real life we are far from scrupulous about insisting that winners actually compensate losers.

[Beltway]

In your example, though, technological regression would indeed be a bad thing. The regression in this case is replacing an existing technology–manual windows–with a newer one–automatic windows–that solves the same problem, but solves it less well than the older system did. So your dad would consider the regression from manual to automatic windows to be a bad thing.

I just had a battery go bad in my car.  Modern cars give little or no warning that a battery is going bad.  Suddenly when you try to start the car it won't start.

In this case I had the windows partly open and there was a light drizzle outside.  The power windows would not work.  Fortunately the rain didn't get worse.  Fortunately I got a jump start within 15 minutes, and was able to close the windows and get to the service shop.

Another problem would occur if you had to leave the car and walk somewhere to get access to a local phonebook to get service, and you had valuables in the car that could not be secured by closing the windows and locking the car.

Two problems with the current technology -- battery goes dead (or to insufficient level to power the car) without any advance warning.  Power windows don't work, no way to manually close the windows.

[abefroman329]

In your example, though, technological regression would indeed be a bad thing. The regression in this case is replacing an existing technology–manual windows–with a newer one–automatic windows–that solves the same problem, but solves it less well than the older system did. So your dad would consider the regression from manual to automatic windows to be a bad thing.

I just had a battery go bad in my car.  Modern cars give little or no warning that a battery is going bad.  Suddenly when you try to start the car it won't start.

In this case I had the windows partly open and there was a light drizzle outside.  The power windows would not work.  Fortunately the rain didn't get worse.  Fortunately I got a jump start within 15 minutes, and was able to close the windows and get to the service shop.

Another problem would occur if you had to leave the car and walk somewhere to get access to a local phonebook to get service, and you had valuables in the car that could not be secured by closing the windows and locking the car.

Two problems with the current technology -- battery goes dead (or to insufficient level to power the car) without any advance warning.  Power windows don't work, no way to manually close the windows.

Oh, I once had the motor for a power sunroof die while the sunroof was open, and I was far too broke to have it fixed.  That's one reason I'll never get another car with a sunroof.

[Beltway]

I just had a battery go bad in my car.  Modern cars give little or no warning that a battery is going bad.  Suddenly when you try to start the car it won't start.
In this case I had the windows partly open and there was a light drizzle outside.  The power windows would not work.  Fortunately the rain didn't get worse.  Fortunately I got a jump start within 15 minutes, and was able to close the windows and get to the service shop.
Another problem would occur if you had to leave the car and walk somewhere to get access to a local phonebook to get service, and you had valuables in the car that could not be secured by closing the windows and locking the car.
Two problems with the current technology -- battery goes dead (or to insufficient level to power the car) without any advance warning.  Power windows don't work, no way to manually close the windows.

Oh, I once had the motor for a power sunroof die while the sunroof was open, and I was far too broke to have it fixed.  That's one reason I'll never get another car with a sunroof.

I have a sunroof, and I like having the extra window and light.  You can get a tarp at Lowes for about $15 that is big enough to cover the car in case I have something like that happen in the future.  At least workable when the car is parked.

[abefroman329]

I just had a battery go bad in my car.  Modern cars give little or no warning that a battery is going bad.  Suddenly when you try to start the car it won't start.
In this case I had the windows partly open and there was a light drizzle outside.  The power windows would not work.  Fortunately the rain didn't get worse.  Fortunately I got a jump start within 15 minutes, and was able to close the windows and get to the service shop.
Another problem would occur if you had to leave the car and walk somewhere to get access to a local phonebook to get service, and you had valuables in the car that could not be secured by closing the windows and locking the car.
Two problems with the current technology -- battery goes dead (or to insufficient level to power the car) without any advance warning.  Power windows don't work, no way to manually close the windows.

Oh, I once had the motor for a power sunroof die while the sunroof was open, and I was far too broke to have it fixed.  That's one reason I'll never get another car with a sunroof.

I have a sunroof, and I like having the extra window and light.  You can get a tarp at Lowes for about $15 that is big enough to cover the car in case I have something like that happen in the future.  At least workable when the car is parked.

I was living in Georgia at the time, and it was unbearable in the car during the summer if you had the cover to the sunroof open and the sunroof closed.  I'm no scientist, but I swear it made the greenhouse effect in the car even worse.

[Beltway]

I have a sunroof, and I like having the extra window and light.  You can get a tarp at Lowes for about $15 that is big enough to cover the car in case I have something like that happen in the future.  At least workable when the car is parked.

I was living in Georgia at the time, and it was unbearable in the car during the summer if you had the cover to the sunroof open and the sunroof closed.  I'm no scientist, but I swear it made the greenhouse effect in the car even worse.

That would be an emergency measure that I posted. 

If the sun is overhead I too usually keep the curtain closed.

[abefroman329]

I have a sunroof, and I like having the extra window and light.  You can get a tarp at Lowes for about $15 that is big enough to cover the car in case I have something like that happen in the future.  At least workable when the car is parked.

I was living in Georgia at the time, and it was unbearable in the car during the summer if you had the cover to the sunroof open and the sunroof closed.  I'm no scientist, but I swear it made the greenhouse effect in the car even worse.

That would be an emergency measure that I posted. 

If the sun is overhead I too usually keep the curtain closed.

Keeping the curtain closed solved the problem, but if I need to do that 6 months out of the year, why would I bother getting a sunroof?

[Beltway]

If the sun is overhead I too usually keep the curtain closed.

Keeping the curtain closed solved the problem, but if I need to do that 6 months out of the year, why would I bother getting a sunroof?

Cloudy weather, dawn, dusk, sun low near horizon.  Plenty of times to open curtain.

[J N Winkler]

I just had a battery go bad in my car.  Modern cars give little or no warning that a battery is going bad.  Suddenly when you try to start the car it won't start.

I use a battery maintainer.  I have also heard of people taking out insurance against unplanned battery failure not just by using a maintainer, but also by replacing the battery at a set interval (say two or three years) and having the alternator checked for sufficient output after every second battery replacement.  Admittedly, being able to garage vehicles makes it easier to plug in a maintainer and a rapid charger when needed.

[Beltway]

I just had a battery go bad in my car.  Modern cars give little or no warning that a battery is going bad.  Suddenly when you try to start the car it won't start.

I use a battery maintainer.  I have also heard of people taking out insurance against unplanned battery failure not just by using a maintainer, but also by replacing the battery at a set interval (say two or three years) and having the alternator checked for sufficient output after every second battery replacement.  Admittedly, being able to garage vehicles makes it easier to plug in a maintainer and a rapid charger when needed.

I have a driveway but no garage.  I normally get at least 5 years from a battery.  I just got the car serviced a week before that and the battery supposedly was fine.  This was the battery that was new with the car and it only lasted 2 1/2 years and 75,000 miles.

[abefroman329]

I had a car with a bunch of power accessories and once made the mistake of buying the cheapest battery I could find, and it would burn out the alternator every few years.  Don't skimp on your car battery!

[seicer]

For whatever reason, I got a cheap battery that was rated for some 400 CCA (thereabouts). Of course, it died after 75,000 miles and an AAA rep tried to say it was the alternator that was failing and had it towed to a local shop where they tried to pin a $1,000 cost for a new alternator and battery. I told them to jump the battery on-site (which I was recording) - and what do you know, it worked!

But the battery died twice within a month time span after that so I went in for a replacement at my local auto shop. It was cranking only 300 CCA and could barely start in cold weather. The mechanic replaced it with a monster 800 CCA rated battery which put out a charge above its rate (880 CCA I believe), which should last seven years at a minimum and is warranted for five.

[empirestate]

I think this might also be an example of what you're looking for:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_eye/2015/06/25/air_france_flight_447_and_the_safety_paradox_of_airline_automation_on_99.html

Yes and no. It depends, as with all of these cases, what you consider to be the technological problem being solved. If the problem is "maintaining a course without human intervention", then by definition, autopilot solves that better than human control. But if the problem is "avoiding catastrophic cascading failure of systems and safety procedures", then it certainly isn't.

Just lets define your question a bit tighter. Do you think Elmer is a slow on-going process or a harsh catastrophic event we're witnessing in development?

No. Elmer (if it exists) is an inherent characteristic of cultural progress, observable at the small scale, in discrete cases that fit a recurrent pattern.

And again lets define Elmer carefully. You seem to lump up a few different things under the same umbrella...

Sure. Elmer can be defined as the observable tendency of newer systems to solve specific technological problems less completely than older systems, as an inherent and predictable side effect of overall technological advancement.

An example of Elmer would consist of the following sequence of events:
1. A specific problem exists, to be overcome by a technological solution.
–Example: Words cannot be conveyed instantly across a great distance.
2. Technological systems develop to the point that the problem is substantially solved.
–Example: The telephone allows words to be conveyed instantly across a great distance.
3. A newer technological system emerges that solves the same problem, but is in some way inferior to the earlier system.
–Example: E-mail allows words to be conveyed instantly across a great distance, but without the tone and inflection information that can be conveyed by telephone.
4. The newer system becomes predominant over the older system, or in some cases supplants it entirely.

From the viewpoint of an economist or a historian of technology, it is advantageous to differentiate between cases where technology is abandoned or de-emphasized for economic reasons, and cases where the underlying know-how is lost.  In the former case, the technological frontier of production possibility for a given society remains the same.  In the latter, it shrinks.

I think that's a very apt distinction to make. However, I also believe that the former can potentially lead to the latter, at least for all practical purposes.

[kalvado]

I think this might also be an example of what you're looking for:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_eye/2015/06/25/air_france_flight_447_and_the_safety_paradox_of_airline_automation_on_99.html

Yes and no. It depends, as with all of these cases, what you consider to be the technological problem being solved. If the problem is "maintaining a course without human intervention", then by definition, autopilot solves that better than human control. But if the problem is "avoiding catastrophic cascading failure of systems and safety procedures", then it certainly isn't.

What about a more generic problem - maintaining safety of operations? If you consider that as a problem, use of automation is definitely a solution as number of accidents is decreasing.
On the same page - I do have a steel axe, but I cannot make a replacement when (if) it breaks. Not a problem with most stone tools, material (stones) and tools (stones) are readily available unlike heavy steelwork machines. So do you think that going towards steel tools which require more specific fabrication skills and facilities is an example of Elmer? And steel axe, which brakes way less than a stone one, is still more Elmerish?
If so, then of course it is the way things are normally done.

[empirestate]

I think this might also be an example of what you're looking for:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_eye/2015/06/25/air_france_flight_447_and_the_safety_paradox_of_airline_automation_on_99.html

Yes and no. It depends, as with all of these cases, what you consider to be the technological problem being solved. If the problem is "maintaining a course without human intervention", then by definition, autopilot solves that better than human control. But if the problem is "avoiding catastrophic cascading failure of systems and safety procedures", then it certainly isn't.

What about a more generic problem - maintaining safety of operations? If you consider that as a problem, use of automation is definitely a solution as number of accidents is decreasing.

Very true, and this is something we will have to reckon with as autonomous cars come into widespread use. It's also an interesting example of a false positive for Elmer–many people are hesitant about autonomous cars because they believe the older system, human control, will be better at preventing accidents than the autonomous system. (That may even prove correct in certain very specific instances, but not overall.)

On the same page - I do have a steel axe, but I cannot make a replacement when (if) it breaks. Not a problem with most stone tools, material (stones) and tools (stones) are readily available unlike heavy steelwork machines. So do you think that going towards steel tools which require more specific fabrication skills and facilities is an example of Elmer?

Perhaps, although can you readily fashion a new stone axe as easily as you could purchase a new steel one?

[kalvado]

On the same page - I do have a steel axe, but I cannot make a replacement when (if) it breaks. Not a problem with most stone tools, material (stones) and tools (stones) are readily available unlike heavy steelwork machines. So do you think that going towards steel tools which require more specific fabrication skills and facilities is an example of Elmer?

Perhaps, although can you readily fashion a new stone axe as easily as you could purchase a new steel one?

Well, we're mostly talking about some fringe situations - broken motor on a window, reception in a obscure location..

In that sense factoring ability to drive to Home Depot is not fair, we are talking about abnormal fringe situations.

[formulanone]

On the same page - I do have a steel axe, but I cannot make a replacement when (if) it breaks. Not a problem with most stone tools, material (stones) and tools (stones) are readily available unlike heavy steelwork machines. So do you think that going towards steel tools which require more specific fabrication skills and facilities is an example of Elmer?

Perhaps, although can you readily fashion a new stone axe as easily as you could purchase a new steel one?

Well, we're mostly talking about some fringe situations - broken motor on a window, reception in a obscure location..

In that sense factoring ability to drive to Home Depot is not fair, we are talking about abnormal fringe situations.

I dunno...taking about going to Home Depot on this particular forum seems quite normal.

I gather that at some point in the late Stone Age, someone was upset by the convenience, though the chiseled comments or stone piles may be lost to the ages.

[kalvado]

On the same page - I do have a steel axe, but I cannot make a replacement when (if) it breaks. Not a problem with most stone tools, material (stones) and tools (stones) are readily available unlike heavy steelwork machines. So do you think that going towards steel tools which require more specific fabrication skills and facilities is an example of Elmer?

Perhaps, although can you readily fashion a new stone axe as easily as you could purchase a new steel one?

Well, we're mostly talking about some fringe situations - broken motor on a window, reception in a obscure location..

In that sense factoring ability to drive to Home Depot is not fair, we are talking about abnormal fringe situations.

I dunno...taking about going to Home Depot on this particular forum seems quite normal.

I gather that at some point in the late Stone Age, someone was upset by the convenience, though the chiseled comments or stone piles may be lost to the ages.

There is a hole bunch of typed comments up the stream about how bad convenience of electric drives actually is...

[empirestate]

Perhaps, although can you readily fashion a new stone axe as easily as you could purchase a new steel one?

Well, we're mostly talking about some fringe situations - broken motor on a window, reception in a obscure location..

In that sense factoring ability to drive to Home Depot is not fair, we are talking about abnormal fringe situations.

Oh no, not fringe at all–sorry that my point continues to be so unclear.

The reception issue I used to have when I lived in the Bronx–within the boundaries of the nation's most populous city. I now live 40 miles farther out than that, but I have a 50-mile antenna, readily available on the market (along with longer-distance models). This would apply to huge numbers of quite typical households.

Another example we've talked about quite a bit is telephone vs. e-mail. And you could extend the same to any textual, online method of communication, such as social media, or this forum. I don't think I need to present to you any persuasive evidence that large numbers of people use these technologies, nor that large numbers of people have seen the effects of the missing tone and inflection information that these systems lack. Indeed, it's practically a defining aspect of our society, anymore...

So yeah, not fringe cases or obscure situations at all. Even the broken car window isn't obscure–it may not happen to everyone all of the time, but the possibility of it is inherent in any cases where motorized windows are used, which is almost always in modern conventional passenger cars.