2023-12-30


Worthy

  • "No inventions; no innovations" A History of US Steel

    When it was formed in 1901, it was by far the largest company in the world, and produced nearly 2/3rds of American steel. Today, it makes just 12% of American steel, around a third of the steel that it made in 1955, and employs around the same number of people as online pet retailer Chewy.

    US Steel’s enormous size made it unwieldy and difficult to manage. It took time for information to filter up through the many layers of management between the factory floor and company leadership, and to get all of the disparate operations of the company moving in the same direction. This, on top of the fundamental conservative culture created by Gary, and the lack of top management talent as former Carnegie executives abandoned the company, caused US Steel to steadily lose market share to its more agile rivals.

    The American steel industry responded to the rise of foreign producers not by trying to improve their operations, but by demanding government protection from “unfair” foreign trade practices. In 1968, steel producers in Japan and Europe, at the behest of President Lyndon Johnson, agreed to artificially restrict their steel exports to the US. This was intended to give US producers “breathing room” to modernize their facilities and improve operations, though this didn’t occur (in fact, capital investment by American steelmakers declined after the agreements). And though pressure had been temporarily removed, things were about to get much worse for US Steel and the American steel industry.

    Arguably, US Steel has been a disappointment since the day it was formed. It was created as a fundamentally conservative reaction to the vicissitudes of the steel industry, and this guided its early years and shaped its culture. The economies of scale it achieved were never passed on to the consumer, and instead it used its size to bully other steelmakers and extract money from consumers. When this stopped working, it used its political influence to prevent consumers from buying low-cost foreign steel. Improving the efficiency of its operations was something it did as a last resort when left with no other options.


Rank Propaganda / Thought Policing / World Disordering

TechSuck / Geek Bait

  • Electronics Flea Market | Hacker News

  • Open Source Liability is Coming | Developers Alliance

    You might be surprised to learn that, as I write, the EU is finalizing rules that will make open-source creators and licensees liable for any user harm their software might cause. The focus for lawmakers is that, like cars and chainsaws, software is complex and can be inherently dangerous. Policymakers believe that consumers are at a disadvantage when things go horribly wrong: how can they prove someone sold them faulty software when they can’t hope to understand how apps work or how they’re created? The solution they’re adopting is to shift the onus to the software and app creators to prove their code didn’t do anything wrong. This will be burdensome but is at least possible if you write and market your own code. But what if you’re just part of a collaborative open source project, give away your app, or if there’s open source code in the product you put on the market? Who gets blamed when open source might be the heart of the problem?

AI Will (Save | Destroy) The World

Space / Boomy Zoomers / UFO

Gubmint / Poilitcks / Law Making