Made to Break, Giles Slade, Part 2

One of the revolutionary technology developed during the Twentieth century was the radio. It would affect all aspects of life, from commercial, industrial, personal, and military. One of the many problems that plagued it was the signal and static over the radio. However, even this was not unaffected by obsolesce, as certain radio technologies are made to function as long as its original durability. According to Slade, by the 1950s, the product life spans were no longer left to chance, but rather created by plan. The miniaturization of the radio as well as the elimination of static supposedly brought all this to plan. The consumers that purchase these new radios would see that s disposable, thus adding to the obsolescence. Personally, I don’t see the obsolescence of the portable radio, probably because I have never owned one. However, chances are that it would break under my care anyways, regardless whether they were designed for obsolescence or not. Regardless, I would try to make it work quite possibly beyond the planned life span it had. But as I said, I have never used or experienced the radio in great effect.
    As the century progressed, many new products came into existence, and with them, their own death dates as well. After World War 2, the Atomic Age was upon us, and with it, the ideas of obliteration from nuclear annihilation, and new effects that can and will create a “’blanket of obsolescence not only over the methods and the products of man but over man himself.’” One of the things that ran contrary to planned obsolescence was the Volkswagen automobiles, specifically the VW Beetle. The Beetles throughout the year did not make superficial model changes, with each yearly Beetle the same as the previous to it. This was something that the Volkswagen advertised, the anti-obsolescence stance of the automobile. It is something I agree with, as the car has not really changed through the years and plenty of them are seen on the road.

Made to Break, Giles Slade, Part 1

The book Made to Break by Giles Slade brings up the idea of planned obsolescence. It is a business model, a way of life, and a uniquely American invention. The idea behind planned obsolescence is that products in the United States are made to break, made to be broken after a certain time. What that means is that objects are made so they break and consumers will need to buy new products. This is born from our Capitalist economy. The manufactured goods are limited in durability and are used to stimulate repetitive consumption. This can be seen in the clichéd look on how goods, such as televisions and toasters, always break down after the warranty expires. In this case, the planned obsolescence is that the durability of the good expires after the warranty ends, and as such, the consumer would need to buy a new television or refrigerator.
Another look at planned obsolescence  is in the idea of annual model change. This idea first introduced in 1927 by General Motors. Under the guidance of Alfred P. Sloan, GM made important innovations in marketing, specifically a hierarchy of brands and continual change in the form of the annul model. I doing so, spurred competition with competing car manufacturers, such as Cadillac. By releasing annual models with additions, manufacturers hope to gain a competitive edge over competitors. This planned obsolescence is an American idea, and the car production was America’s flagship industry. The lessons of obsolescence will soon be quickly copied in all other areas of manufacturing. This is seen throughout history, and extends into the present and even into the future. In today’s economy, cars are continually being produced with annual models, with little difference between years.  Usually with some small added features that are new as technology advances, such as blue-tooth or mp3/i-pod jacks.
Personally, I don’t need any added feature or such, just a vehicle that works. My 1993 Toyota Corolla is old and out-of-date, but it has served me for the past 5 years fine and possibly for another few years. However, the car is breaking down, and now has trouble starting in cold weather.  Here, I can see obsolescence as I will need to buy a new car once the car completely breaks down. As implied in the title of the book, goods are made to break after a while and not to last the tests of time.

The World and Wikipedia Part 2

Wikipedia was something that was a revolution of its time. The open encyclopedia was something that almost everyone liked. Why we love it comes in many different reasons, but one of the main component is that it’s a virtual world. We the community work to make this virtual world work, and let our work be explored by others. In this sense, the community, the people, make Wikipedia work, because without people, there would be no articles, no contributions, no nothing of the sort. This sense of building something that the entire world will read and see is a feeling that many love. It somewhat empowers us, and that is one of the reason, I believe, that we love Wikipedia.
Another thing we love Wikipedia is that it lets us write anything about whatever we want.  It lets us write about topics on things normally not found in encyclopedia or other sources. Things of the Star Wars universe, Lord of the Rings setting, online games, and other stuff are usually not explored in regular encyclopedias or reputable sources, but they are widely explored with in Wikipedia. There are lengthy articles on the setting of the Star War universe, including story, lore, history, religion, and other aspects. The fiction world of Star Wars come alive through Wikipedia and widely explored with in Wikipedia, something that does not happen in other media or reference sources. I think it’s this that people really love about Wikipedia, and something that makes us come back to it everytime.

The World and Wikipedia: How We Are Editing Reality

    The World and Wikipedia: How We Are Editing Reality is a book that engages us into the reference source that has changed our lives. The book shows us the inner workings of Wikipedia and why we hate it or love it, and why we always use it. The book starts off with examples of the involvement of users and their ability to change Wikipedia. It starts with the earthquake that struck central Italy on April 6, 2009. Within the hour, there was a Wikipedia article about it. By the end of the day, there was two different articles in two different languages: English and Spanish, both exceeded 1000 words in length and contained maps and tables. There were a total of 20 different language articles were created on the subject by day’s end. This shows the positive side of Wikipedia, as people rallied together to bring news and information of a tragic event together to be shared to the world.
    However, as with anything, it is not immune to vandalism and  defacement. The books cites an incident that happened on March 25, 2009, in which a person set up an account under the username Keykingz13. 6 minutes after setting up this account, began to change information on the Wikipedia to various articles. His further editing betrayed the fact that he did not speak English naturally through his grammatically incorrect English. It was not till five days later that all the damage that he made was reversed and corrected. This course of action reveals the relation between man and technology.
    I believe that the author brings up a valid point in the talking about the relationship between man and technology. My belief here is that technology is not naturally good nor evil, but rather it is up to the people that use it and perpetrate it.  In both cases presented, it was the user who decided on how they were going to utilize Wikipedia. In the first case, the technology is used for good, in that people gathered information on the earthquake and its effect and share it with others who want to know about it. It proves useful to connect people from around the world. Wikipedia allowed people to connect and share. However, there are people that would purposefully deface it and share false facts and lies, as seen in the second instance. It is up to the person to decide what to make of the technology.
    As for a reason why people hate Wikipedia, it is mentioned in the book is that Wikipedia allows anyone to edit it. It is one of the first thing that was criticized, and how it was vulnerable to vandalism. However, Wikipedia has generated some surprisingly accurate articles. An example of the vulnerability of being able to change the articles is an example I witnessed while watching the Colbert Report. Colbert urged his viewers to change the article on reality to display “Reality is a commodity.” Within 10 seconds of this statement, the article was changed at least half a dozen time. We see through this how people can easily change articles on Wikipedia. However, luckily, the article was locked down within the minute so that it could not be changed. One of the things many people seem to underestimate is the number of people working to keep Wikipedia free from vandalism and accurate. Overall the book brings forth many different points arguing for and against Wikipedia.