Showing posts with label revolution. Show all posts
Showing posts with label revolution. Show all posts

Wednesday, 12 August 2015

Invention Spawned Fashion Revolution

Isaac Merrit Singer's (American inventor) first sewing machine, patented 1851. From Genius Rewarded or the Story of the Sewing Machine, New York, 1880.Wood engraving.
Wood engraving image of Isaac Merrit Singer's first sewing machine, patented 1851.


Aug. 12, 1851: Isaac Singer patents the sewing machine

{"uid":1,"hostPeerName":"http://time.com","initialGeometry":"{\"windowCoords_t\":0,\"windowCoords_r\":1366,\"windowCoords_b\":728,\"windowCoords_l\":0,\"frameCoords_t\":548.53125,\"frameCoords_r\":1295.015625,\"frameCoords_b\":1148.53125,\"frameCoords_l\":995.015625,\"styleZIndex\":\"auto\",\"allowedExpansion_t\":365.53125,\"allowedExpansion_r\":42.984375,\"allowedExpansion_b\":0,\"allowedExpansion_l\":669.015625,\"xInView\":1,\"yInView\":0.15744791666666666}","permissions":"{\"expandByOverlay\":true,\"expandByPush\":false,\"readCookie\":false,\"writeCookie\":false}","metadata":"{\"shared\":{\"sf_ver\":\"1-0-2\",\"ck_on\":1,\"flash_ver\":\"18.0.0\"}}","reportCreativeGeometry":false}" scrolling="no" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" width="300" height="600" data-is-safeframe="true" style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; box-sizing: border-box; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: transparent; border-width: 0px; border-style: initial; vertical-align: bottom;">

any outside the prison population agreed. The Singer Company became one of America’s first multinational corporations, and a staggeringly successful one at that. At a time when the average American income totaled $500, Singer sewing machines were selling for $125 — and they were
selling. As TIME noted, by the time Isaac Singer died in 1875, his company was turning a profit of $22 million a year.The Singer sewing machine was so revolutionary that even Mahatma Gandhi, who eschewed all other machines, made an exception for it. After learning to sew on a Singer in a British jail, Gandhi called it“one of the few useful things ever invented.”
Singer didn’t invent the first sewing machine, but the one he patented on this day, Aug. 12, in 1851, was the most practical — and the most commercially viable. Its success was a testament to Singer’s industrious spirit: he’d worked variously as an actor, a ditch digger and a cabinetmaker before striking it rich in the sewing field.
Fans of the new machine hailed from all walks of life. Among the most notable:
  • The publisher of America’s first fashion magazine, Lady’s Book, who gushed: “Next to the plough, [the sewing machine] is perhaps humanity’s most blessed instrument.” (After it became a fixture among dressmakers, women’s fashions changed dramatically, per TIME — “bedecked with ribbons and yards of machine-made frills.”)
  • The Wright brothers, who made the covering for their first airplane wing on a Singer sewing machine.
  • Admiral Richard Byrd, the polar explorer, who brought six of the machines along on his Antarctic expeditions.
  • Russia’s Czar Alexander III, who put his soldiers to work on Singer sewing machines to make 250,000 tents for the Imperial Army.
Singer himself cared less about the usefulness of the device than about the wealth it brought him, however. “I don’t care a damn for the invention. The dimes are what I’m after,” he once said, according to TIME. He was perhaps more fond of his other creation: the first payment plan, which allowed his customers to pay in installments for a machine too expensive for most to afford as a lump sum.
It was in keeping with Singer’s business ideals, then, that the company, which had diversified heavily in the 1960s and 1970s, ditched sewing machines altogether in the mid-1980s — in the face of increased competition from Asian manufacturers and a steep decline in home sewing — to focus on its more profitable aerospace division. (It spun off its sewing operations to a separate firm, which continues to manufacture under the Singer name.)
So while Singer’s invention may have impressed Gandhi, his life philosophy likely did not. Singer amassed a personal fortune of about $13 million; some of it, per TIME, “supported the 24 children that Singer fathered by two wives and at least three mistresses. He died in England at the age of 64, while constructing a half-a-million-dollar mansion that he referred to facetiously as his ‘wigwam.’”

Monday, 3 August 2015

job revolution is coming,we can't ignore it

job revolution coming,we can't ignore it,


RobotsPHOTO: We are still only at the very beginning of the debate over the future of work, and the capabilities of technology.
We need to confront the changing nature of work and technology, and admit that jobs are on the line. Let's not bury our heads in the sand and let the discussion be dominated by vested interests and naysayers, writes Tim Dunlop.
While the Labor Party Conference was in full swing last week, there was a Fringe Conference running parallel to it. I went to a few sessions, including one that was called The Past and Future of Work.
It was an eye-opener, though not in the way I anticipated.
Overall, the speakers provided an interesting and heartfelt discussion, but what stood out was their total failure to mention any of the following: artificial intelligence, 3D printing, financialisation, the "sharing" economy.
Overall, the speakers provided an interesting and heartfelt discussion, but what stood out was their total failure to mention any of the following: artificial intelligence, 3D printing, financialisation, the "sharing" economy.
The words "robot" or "robotics" were not heard once.
How exactly do you talk about the future of work without mentioning any of these things - developments that are drastically changing what we understand by "work"?
It seems to me that the world is increasingly divided into two political types: those who think that - thanks to various technological developments - jobs we take for granted today will disappear and will not be replaced; and those who think this is some sort of massive exaggeration.
You'll notice that this is pretty similar to how people divide up over the issue of climate change too - acceptance and denial - and this is hardly surprising.
The debate often becomes less over the facts than a defence of entrenched positions (think coal and renewable energy).
As it happens, we are still only at the very beginning of the debate over the future of work, and the capabilities of the technology - especially robotics and artificial intelligence - still aren't clear enough for people to be able to say with any certainty what will happen.
So while we can point to, for example, the trialling of driverless cars on the roads of South Australia, and the actual use of driverless trucks in Rio Tinto's mines in Western Australia, the idea that entire swathes of jobs in the transport industry will no longer be required still seems remote.
Even an authoritative report like that put out by Oxford University in 2013 can seem somewhat unreal. Researchers Carl Benedikt Frey and Michael A. Osborne looked at 702 occupations in the United States and concluded that within the next 20 years, "about 47 per cent of total US employment is at risk" from technological advances.
If this seems scary - that almost half the jobs they looked at are likely to disappear inside 20 years - it isn't hard to find equally authoritative types who will tell you to calm down a bit.