About the Institute for the Future

About Future Now


  • IFTF's Future Now draws on research and forecasting at the Institute for the Future, a Palo Alto, CA think tank specializing in the future of technology, health, and organizational change. It began in September 2003.

Who is Future Now?

  • IFTF's Future Now is a group weblog, founded by Institute research director Alex Soojung-Kim Pang in September 2003. Its contributors include IFTF researchers interested in emerging technologies, the future of Asia, and the social and economic impacts on new technologies; IFTF corporate affiliates; academic partners; and members of the Innovation Lab, a Danish futures group with offices in Aarhus and Copenhagen. A complete list of contributors is available here.

The Future of Cities - A conversation about global urbanization in the 21st century

Virtual China

« Public Geodata - OpenStreetMap, Shapewiki and GeoCommons | Main | links for 2007-05-31 »

May 30, 2007

Manufacturing 2.0

One of the distinctive features of Web 2.0, I've felt, is an understanding that humans are very good at certain things, computers are really good at different things, and groups of people are good at yet other things; and that creating systems that combine individual, machine, and collective intelligence will be powerful-- more powerful than, for example, software that tries to mimic human capabilities.

Today, while reading Bill Leslie's brilliant article, "Blue Collar Science,"* on Western Electric's efforts to commercialize the transistor and integrated circuit-- a category of work that, he argues, is just as important in the history of R&D as the more famous and detached style of research that we normally think of as "R&D"-- I came across this 1964 quote by Eugene Anderson, a Bell Labs researcher:

[H]ighly complex assembly machines... are always expensive and are extremely specialized. A change in design or technology can turn a beautiful machine into a boat anchor overnight. We tend to forget that while labor costs are high, so is the cost of capital. We are finding that simple tools coupled with the sensing, judging and tactile abilities of people are often more desirable than complex machinery. It is very difficult to make a machine that has the eyeball sensory abilities or is as smart as even a scatterbrained 18-year old... at least for the same cost and flexibility.

A similar kind of relationship between human and machine, which recognizes that symbiotic systems can sometimes do better work, more cheaply, than ones that try to cut humans out of the loop.

* Stuart W. Leslie, "Blue collar science: Bringing the transistor to life in the Lehigh Valley," Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Science 32:1 (2001), 71-113.

Technorati Tags: , , ,

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/270861/18924258

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Manufacturing 2.0:

Comments

Manufacturing 2.0 is something I'm actively working on. I was the co-founder of Lighthammer (Manufacturing 1.5 ;-) ) and am passionately committed to realizing the Manufacturing 2.0 vision.

I have a question for you Rick...
What I feel is that Manufacturing 2.0 will be the play game of big solution players like IBM, SAP, Invensys, Microsoft and Oracle. What do you feel?
If at all small players (IT service providers) have some role to play what will that be?

The comments to this entry are closed.

Search Future Now

Blog powered by TypePad

IFTF Flickr

  • www.flickr.com
    This is a Flickr badge showing photos in a set called Work. Make your own badge here.

    See all IFTF-tagged pictures on Flickr

September 2008

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30