[HN Gopher] Buckminster Fuller's greatest invention was his own ... ___________________________________________________________________ Buckminster Fuller's greatest invention was his own image Author : conanxin Score : 55 points Date : 2022-09-01 15:12 UTC (7 hours ago) (HTM) web link (newrepublic.com) (TXT) w3m dump (newrepublic.com) | swayvil wrote: | Step 1 : create your mythology. | | Step 2 : live it | | It's an effective algorithm. Maybe even better than "invent a | bunch of stuff". | | The face and memes live for a thousand years. The _Dymaxion_ | fades pretty fast. | | Ironically, though we are obsessed with machinery and endlessly | discuss it, study it and work at it, it is only a tiny corner of | our world. | [deleted] | hooverd wrote: | I will remember the Dymaxion car. A cross between "the Homer" | and an Airstream. | michaelwww wrote: | Inventing a public persona for fun and profit is a tradition in | America (I can't speak for other countries.) I read a really good | book on the topic many years ago: "Inventing Mark Twain: The | Lives of Samuel Langhorne Clemens." I should read it again, | because it was very interesting. Ben Franklin was another one | from humble beginnings that turned himself into a world renown | Parisian diplomat and inventor, among many other things. | | Edit: my favorite story of self-reinvention is the story of Korla | Pandit. I love it because it's something I would have done. | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korla_Pandit | causality0 wrote: | I had a lot more respect for Fuller before I learned about his | "don't try to change behavior, technology will fix the problem" | approach to nearly every societal ill including climate change. | [deleted] | UniverseHacker wrote: | I don't think that's a fair characterization of his concept | (which he called ephemeralization), e.g. "to do more and more | with less and less until eventually you can do everything with | nothing." He was critical of the lack of effectiveness of | politics, arguing that energy put into it is unlikely to result | in any real change. He showed that one could promote a radical | new technological idea, and be seen as a non-threatening 'out | of touch nerd' to all sides of a contentious political issue | like climate change. This allows you to build cultural momentum | and funding towards a solution and avoid the polarizing | gridlock of politics. | | He absolutely intended to radically change behavior, by | replacing our current way of doing things with a very different | better way, that uses less resources. Not just the same thing | somehow miraculously not problematic. | | Summary: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephemeralization | | This is a different idea than blind technological optimism, | although they seem similar on the surface. | mandmandam wrote: | Am I wrong to think that there's a very strong, quiet, | deliberate push against anything 'idealist' or 'utopian', | more and more? | | It feels like I'm seeing a lot of articles lately that get | deep thinkers quite wrong, or which use their personal | character flaws to invalidate their ideas. | | Nuance as a concept seems to be dying more now even than | under Trump, and it feels _artificial_. Deliberately | instigated. | | ... Am I being overly paro here? | rglover wrote: | It's an extremely reasonable POV considering that he doesn't | exclude human behavior as a variable. Unfortunately, most CC | extremists do this to such a degree that their arguments are | laughable/psychologically concerning. | | People aren't going to (and frankly, shouldn't have to if | there's an option/solution) dial back their lifestyle unless | they're forced at the barrel of a gun or it happens by | circumstance. That it's even possible to rely on technology as | a solution is a good thing and makes sense. | | Why make life miserable if you don't have to? And to be clear: | we absolutely don't. Any miserable outcome is redirecting | technology away from a solution (e.g., safe, abundant nuclear | energy) towards technocratic authoritariaism (digital IDs, | CBDCs, etc) and other psychopathic control systems that rely on | extreme subjugation of human beings. | Retric wrote: | Seems like a reasonable argument. | | Technology _is_ doing vastly more for climate change than | behavior. | analog31 wrote: | Also, technology is changing behavior. | Retric wrote: | In what way? | | An end user can't tell if electricity came from a wind farm | or a coal power plant. | Rekksu wrote: | This article isn't really about Bucky Fuller so much as it is | about a 21st century skeptic's view of technological optimism. | The criticisms feel weak unless you are predisposed against his | philosophy. | | In so far as the critique has any merit, it comes from | comparisons to him and others who make careers out of commentary | and punditry (inherently self-aggrandizing professions). I think | that type of work is actually legitimate, though it is a) | basically what publications like Slate and TNR are for and b) not | really a complete summary of Fuller's work, which succeeded in | genuine contributions to architecture. | djmips wrote: | You said what I was trying to say in my comment but way better. | ;-) | djmips wrote: | When they disparage Fuller being in a line-up in an Apple | Commercial that includes Dylan, Einstein, Muhammad Ali - my first | thought is that it's not that he doesn't fit in because he's not | actually notable but that he does fit in - those people | notability are also a product of PR. Dylan in particular is in | the business of 'image'. Ali for sure and even Einstein's fame | was hugely out of proportion with his actual contributions. MLK's | job was to grab minds (for a good cause). I used to hate sales | and maybe most engineers do but it's really a fact of human | existence. | noir_lord wrote: | > Einstein's fame was hugely out of proportion with his actual | contributions | | Hugely?. I'd accept there was some variance (as you'd expect) | but hugely made me stop and consider what you mean here. | djmips wrote: | Well I considered my wording and maybe it's the wrong word | but for example, Maxwell isn't well known beyond people who | are interested in science. So although Einstein's | contributions were great there are many many others who don't | have the PR. | | Remember we are talking about public fame. | paulpauper wrote: | He's sorta like a mix between Seth Godin and Elon Musk | UniverseHacker wrote: | Yet another post hating on Fuller without understanding his work | or ideas. I would like to quote what I posted two weeks ago about | this: | | > I think there is a lot of desire to 'cancel' historical tech | visionaries like Fuller nowadays, because we are all burned out, | depressed, and disengaged- feeling that our efforts have no real | effect, and are pointless. It's easier to say people like Fuller | didn't really do much, than to admit that we are capable of so | much more. | | > Instead of thinking of him as a con-artist and self promoter, | realize that his actions also fit someone that - well into his | late 80s, still felt the joy, open mindedness, and limitless | possibilities that young kids feel, and is usually burned out of | us. He was so excited about what was possible! | | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32513327 | Isamu wrote: | Can we appreciate someone's contributions without idolizing | them? | | I would agree, yes, he had some objectively interesting ideas | and proposals. | | The idolizing masses surrounding him makes it impossible to | critique things like his Synergetics textbook, which was ... | not good to be generous. | cxr wrote: | The thing that this article mentioned and that your comment | doesn't pick up on is that there is a new biography out on | Fuller. This article is a quasi review, and the contents of the | new book doesn't consist solely of uncritical praise. It's a | proper biography and contains details that weren't widely | discussed before. Unsurprising: not everything about a person's | life will be good. | | Opining about why people are talking about the less rosy | aspects of Fuller's life right now is like if you transported | yourself back to the release of Isaacson's biography on Jobs | and concerned yourself with why people were discussing the | negative details regarding the incidents that Isaacson wrote | about. | | The author worked with bfi.org to write the book. Calling this | "hating on Fuller without understanding his work or ideas" or | an attempt to cancel him is silly. (Not least of all because, | you know, he's dead.) | UniverseHacker wrote: | Thanks for the context. I have been confused to see so many | seemingly out of the blue critical posts about Fuller | recently, and wasn't aware of this biography. I'm sure he's | far from a perfect person... but his ideas have really had a | positive impact on my life, and it would be a real shame if | he was relabeled as a con artist that created nothing of | value, thus discouraging others from benefiting form his | books and ideas. | [deleted] | hooverd wrote: | limitless possibilities? | UniverseHacker wrote: | yes, fixed | kibwen wrote: | These articles aren't "cancelling" Fuller, they're just | dispelling some of his mythology. Indeed, there may be a modern | trend towards disillusionment with self-proclaimed visionaries, | but that's not necessarily any worse (or better) than what came | before. We can evaluate Fuller's legacy with clear eyes and | manage to conclude that, while his energy and enthusiasm was | laudable, that idealism alone will not save the world. | | (And I say this as someone whose favorite map projection is, by | far, the Dymaxion map.) | paulpauper wrote: | Agree. No one is trying to cancel him. It's just his legacy | is greatly overinflated and his inventions had minimal or no | impact on everyday life. It goes to show the power of | marketing and perseverance if anything. | hooverd wrote: | And yet, the spirit of the Dymaxion Chronofile persists | here. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-09-01 23:00 UTC)