Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
This is a sophomoric oversimplification.

The US and Europe might have lost a lot of craftsmanship knowledge at a social level. Yet, what is left is so far ahead of what has ever existed in countries in South America for example. And China has gained a lot. Witness that youtuber trying to make grill brushes in the US. These differences have an impact in terms of opportunities and competition.

It's easy to sit at home, watch documentaries and picture history progressing along logical lines and imagine that the "industrial revolution" was this massive shift from craftsmanship to automation. Look closer and you'll see that what happened in the UK in the 1700s was in fact enabled by a long and deep tradition of craftsmanship that only got enriched by the rise of new power sources. Craftsmanship today is vastly more advanced than it ever was before industry.

And there is a lot to lose in the decline of craftsmanship, and it is by no means some sort of historical inevitability.

When you really start digging deep into history you realize most arguments of logical trends therein are mostly just misconceptions.

It certainly doesn't feel like craftsmanship has gained any kind of higher social standing in our time though. The Zeitgeist of the modern times seems to be one of 'try to do the cheapest sellable thing while paying people the least possible'.

Real craftsmanship, the kind that leaves you in awe and feels like an exceptional display of human capacity, seems to be relegated, from my point of view, to a minority of well-off hobbyists who are already free from work and can do what they want without worrying about paying bills.

Every craftsman I know expresses discomfort that the only way they can turn a profit is to sell goods to wealthy people.
So just like before the industrial revolution then. Because back then (pre-1750 or so), most goods were made for the wealthy as well.
That seems odd. I'd rather turn a profit selling goods to people who can easily afford them than selling goods to people who will have to make hard choices or struggle to find the money.
loading story #49200927
loading story #49200149
> Craftsmanship today is vastly more advanced than it ever was before industry.

yes, but no. Many craft skills used in jewelry, architecture and others are lost. For example, some goldsmithing techniques well-known in the 1700s are not reproducible today.

source: trained goldsmith

> Look closer and you'll see that what happened in the UK in the 1700s was in fact enabled by a long and deep tradition of craftsmanship that only got enriched by the rise of new power sources. Craftsmanship today is vastly more advanced than it ever was before industry.

I suspect the horses are healthier and stronger than in the 1700s too. I'm not sure I understand your point?

I'd agree that the niche of extremely high quality, bespoke craftsmanship still exists, and that in some cases jobs were augmented by technology rather than entirely replaced, but the point still stands that the work these people used to do has been automated and disrupted by technology.

The fact some people upskilled or reskilled as a response is analogous to coders today. All I'd question is the extent of the disruption we'll see as a result of AI – I worry that this time things will change much more quickly and there may not be plenty of other jobs for people to upskill / reskill in to.

But if that's not true then perhaps whatever software engineering exists in the future will be far more complex than what software engineers have done for the last few decades.

Craftsmanship exists everywhere and is as they say vastly superior, or at least more capable, than ever.

Every random business has some machine that puts caps on bottles or something, and these things are ridiculously better designed, engineered, and fabricated than ever before, because the knowledge and tools available to the designer and fabricator are better than ever before.

You are surrounded by things that are insanely well made by all previous standards. Even the crappy stuff that you don't think of as well-made, because it is junk compared to everything else, still has many aspects that are almost magic.

> I suspect the horses are healthier and stronger than in the 1700s too. I'm not sure I understand your point?

Horses? I doubt it. They're still infamously fragile creatures today, even with penicillin and vaccinations existing; similarly for strength, not much call for shires and they're now on an "at risk" conservation list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shire_horse -> https://www.rbst.org.uk/watchlist-breed/shire-horse/

Possibly also fewer horses in total, though I don't know any stats for that far back and may be over-estimating based on the stats I do have for c. 1900.

The current breeds of horses the Amish use are far stronger and healthier than they were even 100 years ago. For example, current draft horses are so strong they can outperform mules and oxen, and running horses are absurdly fast. I heard of a guy who regularly zips around at 20 MPH with a buggy or cart. That simply wasn’t possible in the 200s.

Of course the costs are higher too. Good horses in the above category can go for north of $100k.