A Quote by David Harvey

But planned obsolescence is possible only if the rate of technological change is contained. — © David Harvey
But planned obsolescence is possible only if the rate of technological change is contained.
Perhaps it is this specter that most haunts working men and women: the planned obsolescence of people that is of a piece with the planned obsolescence of the things they make. Or sell.
With the only certainty in our daily existence being change, and a rate of change growing always faster in a kind of technological leapfrog game, speed helps people think they are catching up.
In most industries, technological change is happening at a rapid rate.
Planned obsolescence is another word for progress.
Our whole economy is based on planned obsolescence.
Planned obsolescence is not really a new concept. God used it with people.
It drives me crazy to throw something out. I find planned obsolescence revolting.
Armaments, universal debt and planned obsolescence - those are the three pillars of Western prosperity.
As companies become bigger, the global environment more competitive, and the rate of disruptive technological innovation ever faster, the value to shareholders of attracting the best possible CEO increases correspondingly.
The rate of technological and human physiological change in the 20th century has been remarkable. Beyond that, a synergy between the improved technology and physiology is more than the simple addition of the two.
Our whole economy is based on planned obsolescence, and anyone who can read without moving his lips should know it by now.
Like Godard, Tati is also remarkably appreciative of the odd beauty that can be revealed in the shapes, patterns and colors created by the technology of planned obsolescence.
Industries with rapid change are the enemy of the investor. Tech businesses, particularly biotech, is a problem from that point of view. All industries work with change, but you should ideally be investing in businesses with a low rate of change, not a high rate of change.
Only one rational path is open to us - simultaneous de-development of the [overdeveloped countries] and semi-development of the underdeveloped countries (UDCs), in order to approach a decent and ecologically sustainable standard of living for all in between. By de-development we mean lower per-capita energy consumption, fewer gadgets, and the abolition of planned obsolescence.
Climate change is not going to be prevented. It's not even going to be mitigated to the degree a rational person would want. As a result we're going to have to live with climate change and try to reduce the extent and rate of change as much as possible. This is not an inspiring or sexy project.
If the rate of change on the outside exceeds the rate of change on the inside, the end is near.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!