“Practical, Captain? Perhaps. But not desirable. Computers make excellent and efficient servants; but I have no wish to serve under them. Captain, a starship also runs on loyalty to one man, and nothing can replace it, or him.” – Star Trek (TOS)
I’d tell you a German knock-knock joke but they already have AI-enabled sensing that lets them know who it is.
Let’s pretend that you had to break a big rock. A really big one, say the size of your mother-in-law’s butt.
Okay, that’s a big ask. The last time I had to break a big rock that big was . . . never. That’s a big rock.
Big rocks, mothers-in-law? You’re thinking, have you had too much ale, John Wilder? Bear with me, this will make as much sense as Joe Biden’s economic policies.
So, we’re back to breaking a stupid rock in our mind because John Wilder asked us to. What’s the most direct way to do it?
What does a member of the Southern Buddhist Church say when they die? “What in the reintarnation is going on here?”
You might think you could use a sledgehammer, but not so fast, Thor. That’s not the most direct way, and Disney® will probably sue me for mentioning Thor because they now have the intellectual property rights on all things Norse. Ignore Disney®, since they don’t have (yet) a copyright on hammers. But I don’t want to give them ideas, because soon enough they’ll have a copyright on interstellar space.
To have a steel hammer, you’d have to make one. That would involve having a mine for iron ore. Then the ore would have to be processed into steel. After you figured out how to do that, you’d have to forge the head of the hammer (it has to be strong, right?).
Even then you’re not done. You have to find a tree, get some wood suitable for a handle, invent an entire industry to just get the knife to carve the handle, and finally mate the handle to the hammer head.
Nope. A hammer isn’t that direct. To have a hammer, you have to have a functioning civilization.
Thor’s enemies never get drunk: they just get hammered.
For the most direct way, you’d have to grab a stone or something hard nearby and just start thwacking the rock.
That’s not very efficient.
A hammer is more efficient. But how about you build a piece of high-strength steel to use as a drill? That’s faster. But the drill requires advances in metallurgy even greater than the hammer head.
Okay, what’s the most efficient way to break rock?
How about you blow it up?
Note to the ATF, this is economics, not a suggestion.
That’s a really good way to make a big rock a bunch of tiny rocks, quickly. But in addition to making your hammer and drill, you have to also create an entire industry dedicated to making explosives.
This points out a lesson from the (dead) Austrian economics dude, Ludwig Von Mises: the most efficient way to do something is the most indirect.
To break a rock more efficiently, you have to look for increasingly more indirect methods. That requires time. It requires effort. And, it requires resources that might be hundreds of miles (around 7 kilometers) away.
We have a really efficient society. We can have fresh strawberries delivered to us (cheaply) in January because they grow them in Peru or some other country that rarely visits here. We can have fresh roses for Valentine’s Day® because we have airplanes that deliver them directly from the cocaine fields. Or something like that. I’m not a botanist.
Efficient is better, right?
Well, no. I’d like to put forward as Wilder’s Exhibit A the human body. Nobody needs two kidneys, at least that’s what the girl in the motel in Vegas told me before I woke up in the bathtub. Yet we have (on average) two. We have two lungs. Everywhere that having a spare part might make it easier for you to pass along your genetic information, the parts are paired. I’ll leave the other locations of other paired organs as an exercise for the reader. I mean, everyone has six toes on their left foot, right?
Wow. Looks like Chee-toes® instead of actual toes.
Not everything is paired. We each have (on average) one brain, though I think my ex-wife had six or so brains, one for each personality and species of venomous snake that she would normally impersonate.
But that single brain is armored as well as it could be. Likewise, physics says that having two hearts works as well as having a man living with two women living under the same roof. Thankfully, we have a solution that’s the next best thing – death.
Two eyes. Two ears. I could go on and on. It appears that humans are designed based on the philosophy that “two is one, and one is none.” Huh.
Efficient designs are vulnerable.
From experience, I can say that any business that has any spare capacity will do anything to use that capacity. Wall Street doesn’t want 90% utilization – Wall Street wants 99%. They want . . . efficiency. They don’t want profits for the next decade, they want profits this year.
Just like I have two lungs, I’ll say this again: Efficient designs are vulnerable.
How many of the semiconductor chips in your life came from Taiwan?
A lot. Here’s what the Financial Times noted:
“Yes, the industry is incredibly dependent on TSMC, especially as you get to the bleeding edge, and it is quite risky,” says Peter Hanbury, a partner at Bain & Company in San Francisco. “Twenty years ago there were 20 foundries, and now the most cutting-edge stuff is sitting on a single campus in Taiwan.”
So, most of the best information and knowledge in making computer chips that define the very essence of your life are built at one factory in a country that the Chinese now know that Joe Biden will defend with all of the force of . . . a strongly worded speech.
The Chinese word for Asia is the same as their word for Taiwan: China.
It’s efficient.
I can’t help wondering how many of the current shortages of “stuff” that we’re seeing is just China messing with us. “Hey, if we turn this lever, what happens to the United States? Oh, man, that was funny. Did you expect to see used car prices go up? And those pickles and baking soda? That was a hoot.”
Outsourcing and internationalizing is efficient. Having no surplus production stored in warehouses is efficient. Having no redundant capacity is efficient.
When efficiency works, it means everyone has more stuff. The factories are working at 100%. The people are consoooming apps and video games and pantyhose and PEZ®.
Did I mention that efficiency is vulnerable?
What happens when an efficient process gets disrupted?
Shortages. Price increases. Business failures. Revolutions.
Maybe the question that we should ask is what can we do to make life less efficient?
I guess I have stock-home syndrome.
More efficiency means empty warehouses. Do you have food storage? Do you have ammo storage? What happens if you lose the grid for an hour? A week? A month?
What happens if you lose the efficiency of modern life for a day? For a week? For a month?
What happens if you lose it for the rest of your life?
What happens if you have to live a life that’s less efficient?
I guess there are always more rocks, right?