As far as I can see, people today often play on the opposition between "high" and "low" tech.
The idea being that "high" tech is often:
* not ecological;
* not repairable;
* not robust (inflexible, finicky, buggy, etc);
* not democratic;
whereas "low" tech fares better in those respects.
I understand it as high-tech being a kind of black-box which final users can only consume without the possibility to tweak, repair, understand and evolve.
I'm looking for examples of what I would call "gradual" or "integrated" technology, in the sense that the object makes use of high tech concepts, either in its conception, or its operation, but where the high-tech aspect does not preclude low-tech use and tweakability/repairability/understandability/evolvability.
Said differently, the high-tech aspect only _adds_ to the product, and does not subtract anything.
I know it's a bit of a vaguely question, but hopefully someone can come along and help me crystallize it :)
0 comments
—
Ask HN: Examples of “Gradual” or “Integrated” Technology? · HackerTrans
* not ecological;
* not repairable;
* not robust (inflexible, finicky, buggy, etc);
* not democratic;
whereas "low" tech fares better in those respects. I understand it as high-tech being a kind of black-box which final users can only consume without the possibility to tweak, repair, understand and evolve.
I'm looking for examples of what I would call "gradual" or "integrated" technology, in the sense that the object makes use of high tech concepts, either in its conception, or its operation, but where the high-tech aspect does not preclude low-tech use and tweakability/repairability/understandability/evolvability. Said differently, the high-tech aspect only _adds_ to the product, and does not subtract anything.
I know it's a bit of a vaguely question, but hopefully someone can come along and help me crystallize it :)