But: nothing against tinkering, a ka creating robot can openers just because we can.
Anyway, I see it more as a poetical piece. People will vote with their feet/money anyway.
Yeah, but his point was nonsensical (or at least hyperbole). He said:
and usually the can ends up half-open, half-bent up to the point where it's un-openable short of dynamite.
Automated can openers usually spoil cans? If that were true, people wouldn't use them because most of their food would go to waste.
His experience was that the can openers never worked, but his parents kept trying and buying new models. Maybe by now they work. Still I don't see why anyone would want to have one. Call me a treehugger, but why waste energy and produce toxic waste for something you could easily do manually.
Is it really that hard to turn a handle for 10 seconds?
No, Mr I'm Not Disabled. It's not hard for us to get up and change the channel on the TV by hand or to walk a mile to WalMart and carry our groceries home each day either.
Do we really need computer-controlled robotic can-opening devices?
Did we really need to go to the moon? Not really, but the effort of doing so spawned a number of significant industries.
Did pg really need to set up a small system for us to post links and stories? Not really, but the relationships and knowledge that have come from it greatly eclipse his plans for it at the time.
Did Linus Torvalds need to play around with making his own small operating system? Not really. We all know what came of that, though.
With technology, intentions don't count for much; the unintended results can easily reach a long way. Perhaps the e-book or the robotic can opening device will inspire unrelated inventions.